The legacy effect of synthetic N fertiliser.

Cumulative crop recovery of synthetic fertiliser nitrogen (N) over several cropping seasons (legacy effect) generally receives limited attention. The increment in crop N uptake after the first-season uptake from fertiliser can be expressed as a fraction (∆RE) of the annual N application rate. This study aims to quantify ∆RE using data from nine long-term experiments (LTEs). As such, ∆RE is the difference between first season (RE1st) and long-term (RELT) recovery of synthetic fertiliser N. In this study, RE1st was assessed either by the 15N isotope method or by a zero-N subplot freshly superimposed on a long-term fertilised LTE treatment plot. RELT was calculated by comparing N uptake in the total aboveground crop biomass between a long-term fertilised and long-term control (zero-N) treatment. Using a mixed linear effect model, the effects of climate, crop type, experiment duration, average N rate, and soil clay content on ∆RE were evaluated. Because the experimental setup required for the calculation of ∆RE is relatively rare, only nine suitable LTEs were found. Across these nine LTEs in Europe and North America, the mean ∆RE was 24.4% (±12.0%, 95% CI) of annual N application, with higher values for winter wheat than for maize. This result shows that fertiliser-N retained in the soil and stubble may contribute substantially to crop N uptake in subsequent years. Our results suggest that an initial recovery of 43.8% (±11%, 95% CI) of N application may increase to around 66.0% (±15%, 95% CI) on average over time. Furthermore, we found that ∆RE was not clearly related to long-term changes in topsoil total N stock. Our findings show that the-often used-first-year recovery of synthetic fertiliser N application does not express the full effect of fertiliser application on crop nutrition. The fertiliser contribution to soil N supply should be accounted for when exploring future scenarios on N cycling, including crop N requirements and N balance schemes. Highlights: Nine long-term cereal experiments in Europe and USA were analysed for long-term crop N recovery of synthetic N fertiliser.On average, and with application rates between 34 and 269 kg N/ha, crop N recovery increased from 43.8% in the first season to 66.0% in the long term.Delta recovery was larger for winter wheat than maize.Observed increases in crop N uptake were not explained by proportionate increases in topsoil total N stock.

Can N2 O emissions offset the benefits from soil organic carbon storage?

To respect the Paris agreement targeting a limitation of global warming below 2°C by 2100, and possibly below 1.5°C, drastic reductions of greenhouse gas emissions are mandatory but not sufficient. Large-scale deployment of other climate mitigation strategies is also necessary. Among these, increasing soil organic carbon (SOC) stocks is an important lever because carbon in soils can be stored for long periods and land management options to achieve this already exist and have been widely tested. However, agricultural soils are also an important source of nitrous oxide (N2 O), a powerful greenhouse gas, and increasing SOC may influence N2 O emissions, likely causing an increase in many cases, thus tending to offset the climate change benefit from increased SOC storage. Here we review the main agricultural management options for increasing SOC stocks. We evaluate the amount of SOC that can be stored as well as resulting changes in N2 O emissions to better estimate the climate benefits of these management options. Based on quantitative data obtained from published meta-analyses and from our current level of understanding, we conclude that the climate mitigation induced by increased SOC storage is generally overestimated if associated N2 O emissions are not considered but, with the exception of reduced tillage, is never fully offset. Some options (e.g. biochar or non-pyrogenic C amendment application) may even decrease N2 O emissions.

Chinese cropping systems are a net source of greenhouse gases despite soil carbon sequestration.

Soil carbon sequestration is being considered as a potential pathway to mitigate climate change. Cropland soils could provide a sink for carbon that can be modified by farming practices; however, they can also act as a source of greenhouse gases (GHG), including not only nitrous oxide (N2 O) and methane (CH4 ), but also the upstream carbon dioxide (CO2 ) emissions associated with agronomic management. These latter emissions are also sometimes termed "hidden" or "embedded" CO2 . In this paper, we estimated the net GHG balance for Chinese cropping systems by considering the balance of soil carbon sequestration, N2 O and CH4 emissions, and the upstream CO2 emissions of agronomic management from a life cycle perspective during 2000-2017. Results showed that although soil organic carbon (SOC) increased by 23.2 ± 8.6 Tg C per year, the soil N2 O and CH4 emissions plus upstream CO2 emissions arising from agronomic management added 269.5 ± 21.1 Tg C-eq per year to the atmosphere. These findings demonstrate that Chinese cropping systems are a net source of GHG emissions and that total GHG emissions are about 12 times larger than carbon uptake by soil sequestration. There were large variations between different cropping systems in the net GHG balance ranging from 328 to 7,567 kg C-eq ha-1  year-1 , but all systems act as a net GHG source to the atmosphere. The main sources of total GHG emissions are nitrogen fertilization (emissions during production and application), power use for irrigation, and soil N2 O and CH4 emissions. Optimizing agronomic management practices, especially fertilization, irrigation, plastic mulching, and crop residues to reduce total GHG emissions from the whole chain is urgently required in order to develop a low-carbon future for Chinese crop production.

Use of ammonium sulphate as a sulphur fertilizer: Implications for ammonia volatilization.

Ammonium sulphate is widely used as a sulphur (S) fertilizer, constituting about 50% of global S use. Within nitrogen (N) management, it is well known that ammonium-based fertilizers are subject to ammonia (NH3) volatilization in soils with pH > 7, but this has been overlooked in decision making on S fertilization. We reviewed 41 publications reporting measurements of NH3 loss from ammonium sulphate in 16 countries covering a wide range of soil types and climates. In field experiments, loss was mostly <5% of applied N in soils with pH (in water) <7.0. In soils with pH > 7.0, there was a wide range of losses (0%-66%), with many in the 20%-40% range and some indication of increased loss (ca. 5%-15%) in soils with pH 6.5-7.0. We estimate that replacing ammonium sulphate with a different form of S for arable crops could decrease NH3 emissions from this source by 90%, even taking account of likely emissions from alternative fertilizers to replace the N, but chosen for low NH3 emission. For every kt of ammonium sulphate replaced on soils of pH > 7.0 in temperate regions, NH3 emission would decrease from 35.7 to 3.6 t NH3. Other readily available sources of S include single superphosphate, potassium sulphate, magnesium sulphate, calcium sulphate dihydrate (gypsum), and polyhalite (Polysulphate). In view of the large areas of high pH soils globally, this change of S fertilizer selection would make a significant contribution to decreasing NH3 emissions worldwide, contributing to necessary cuts to meet agreed ceilings under the Gothenburg Convention.

When does nitrate become a risk for humans?

Is nitrate harmful to humans? Are the current limits for nitrate concentration in drinking water justified by science? There is substantial disagreement among scientists over the interpretation of evidence on the issue. There are two main health issues: the linkage between nitrate and (i) infant methaemoglobinaemia, also known as blue baby syndrome, and (ii) cancers of the digestive tract. The evidence for nitrate as a cause of these serious diseases remains controversial. On one hand there is evidence that shows there is no clear association between nitrate in drinking water and the two main health issues with which it has been linked, and there is even evidence emerging of a possible benefit of nitrate in cardiovascular health. There is also evidence of nitrate intake giving protection against infections such as gastroenteritis. Some scientists suggest that there is sufficient evidence for increasing the permitted concentration of nitrate in drinking water without increasing risks to human health. However, subgroups within a population may be more susceptible than others to the adverse health effects of nitrate. Moreover, individuals with increased rates of endogenous formation of carcinogenic N-nitroso compounds are likely to be susceptible to the development of cancers in the digestive system. Given the lack of consensus, there is an urgent need for a comprehensive, independent study to determine whether the current nitrate limit for drinking water is scientifically justified or whether it could safely be raised.