major challenge in Indian agriculture,,,

1. Showkat Hussain Eytoo
Id. No 38066
Department: Agronomy
INTERVENTIONS FOR INCREASING NUTRIENT USE
EFFICIENCY IN FIELD CROPS
1

2. 2

3. Why NUE??????
• Import of fertilizers of value Rs 34600 crores(2012-13).
• Loss of Rs.2900cr. in India due to losses of N fertilizer .
• 1% increase in NUE in N & P will save Rs.10056 million
• Human health issue- in Punjab & Haryana ground
water samples had Nitrate-N of > 22mg/L.
3

4. Challenges Facing Indian Agriculture
Degrading soil health
Imbalanced fertilizer use
Emerging multi-nutrient deficiencies particularly
of secondary and micronutrients
Declining factor productivity
 Slow growth in food grain productivity
4

5. Fertilizer consumption
during 1967-68 to 2011-12
increased 24 times, the
increase in food grain
production was only 3.5
times.
Food Grain (Mt) Fertilizer(Mt)
1967-68 2012-13 1967-68 2012-13
74.5 257.5 1.1 25.5
5

6. Deteriorating balance in NPK
The N-P-K ratio worsened acutely in certain states
NPK Ratios across states in India for 2013
EAST SOUTH
Bihar 12.3 : 3.6 : 1 Andhra Pradesh 7.1 : 2.8 : 1
Orissa 6.2 : 2.4 : 1 Karnataka 3.6 : 1.6 : 1
West Bengal 2.9 : 1.6 : 1 Tamil Nadu 3.9 : 1.5 : 1
NORTH WEST
Haryana 61.4 : 18.7 : 1 Gujarat 13.2 : 3.4 : 1
Punjab 61.7 : 19.2 : 1 Maharashtra 3.5 : 1.8 : 1
Uttar Pradesh 25.2 : 8.8 : 1 Rajasthan 44.9 : 16.5 : 1
Uttarakhand 16.3:3.9:1 Chhattisgarh 8.06:3.87:1 6

7. Low nutrient use efficiency Causes
Nutrient Efficiency Cause of low efficiency
Nitrogen 30-50 %
Immobilization, volatilization, denitrification,
leaching
Phosphorus 15-20% Fixation in soils Al – P, Fe – P, Ca – P
Potassium 70-80% Fixation in clay - lattices
Sulphur 8-10% Immobilization, Leaching with water
Micro nutrients (Zn,
Fe, Cu, Mn, B)
1-2% Fixation in soils
 The loss of N through leaching and volatilization creates pollution and has
environmental implications.
 P & K fertilizers are imported. Skewed distribution of resources in world.
Limited supply.
7

8. The cause for low NUE and declining response to N fertilizers can be
grouped as follows (NAAS)2005
Low status of soil organic carbon and soil degradation.
Susceptibility of N fertilizers to losses by various mechanisms.
Imbalanced use of fertilizers.
Poor management for secondary and micronutrients, especially S, Zn, Mn, Fe and
B.
Use of high analysis fertilizers like urea and Diammonium phosphate (DAP) and
inadequate addition of organic manures.
Inappropriate Rate, Time and Method of application.
8

9. 9

10. Indices of Nutrient Use Efficiency
10
1. PFP = yield (kg/ha) / Nutrient applied (kg/ha) x 100
2. Agronomic use efficiency = yield (kg/ha) in fertilized
treatment - yield (kg/ha) in unfertilized treatment / Nutrient
applied (kg/ha)
3. Physiological use efficiency = yield fertilized treatment
(kg/ha) - yield unfertilized treatment (kg/ha) / Nutrient uptake in
fertilized treatment (kg/ha) - Nutrient uptake unfertilized
treatment (kg/ha)
4. Apparent recovery efficiency = Nutrient uptake in fertilized
treatment (kg/ha) - Nutrient uptake unfertilized treatment (kg/ha)
/ Nutrient applied (kg/ha)
Mosier et al. (2004)

11. Interventions for increasing nutrient
use efficiency in field crops
1. SOIL BASED INTERVENTIONS
• Rhizosphere management
• Soil chemistry modification.
• Use of controlled release fertilizers
and NH3/NH4 inhibitors
• Source, Method, Rate, and Timing
of Application of Fertilizers.
• Use of Manures.
• Water Management.
2 .PLANT BASED INTERVENTIONS:
• Crop management practices.
• Crop Rotation/ Intercropping.
• Crop Residue Management.
• Green Manuring.
• Use of Nitrogen Efficient
Species/Genotypes.
• Improving biological and Non-
biological N fixation.
• Various tools and techniques.
Foliar application and speciality
fertilizers.
• Customized Fertilizers.
11

12. Adverse
impacts of
poor SHM
Loss of soil
fertility
and
productivi
ty
Economic
loss to
farmers
thereby to
nation
Mortality
of active
beneficial
Soil
Bacteria
Soil
hardening
& erosion
Threat to
food
security

13. Rhizosphere Mangement
Shen et al 2012 chinaRhizosphere management not only increases maize yield by 5–15% with
high yields of 12–15 t ha–1, but also saves considerable chemical inputs by
reducing fertilizer application (40–50% for fertilizer N and by 33% for P)
13

14. Rhizosphere Enrichment through Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi
Zhang, et . al., 2013(A) Mechanisms of nutrient mobilization from soil by Abuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF)
and their contribution to P nutrition and plant growth; (B) pre inoculation of arbuscular
mycorrhizal fungi in sweet potato seedlings; and (C) effects of AMF on sweet potato growth.
14

15. Lavakush, et. al.,
2014 BHU
Varanasi
Effect of rhizosphere enrichment on growth & yield of rice
Treatments
P content (%) in
grain
No. of grain
panicle−1
Grain Yield (g
pot−1)
Control (Uninoculated) 0.226 ±0.001a 114.00 ±1.732a 22.38 ± 1.329a
30 kg P2O5 ha−1 0.238 ±0.003abcd 122.00 ±1.732bc 25.93±17.381bcd
60 kg P2O5 ha−1 0.242 ±0.002bcd 126.00 ±1.732cde 26.46 ± 0.614abcde
CPC + 0 kg P2O5 ha−1 0.232 ±0.003ab 117.00 ±1.452ab 23.95 ± 0.603ab
CPC + 30 kg P2O5 ha−1 0.245 ±0.003cde 125.00 ±1.732cd
27.26±0.629cdef
CPC + 60 kg P2O5 ha−1 0.249 ±0.003def 129.00 ±2.081def 28.53 ± 0.717def
CPC=Combined Pseudomonas Culture of Pseudomonas aeruginosa BHUJY16, P.
aeruginosa BHUJY20, Pseudomonas putida BHUJY13, Pseudomonas putida BHUJY23 and
Pseudomonas fluorescence BHUJY29. Data are presented as mean ±standard error (n = 3),
Mean values in each column with the same superscript(s) do not differ significantly by
Duncan post hoc multiple comparison tests (P≤0.05).
Strain culture 1 ml.
Pot size 28cm,with 7kg soil/pot,3 seedling/pot.
15

16. SOIL CHEMISRTY MODIFCATION
treatment Rice
yield(t/ha)
Apparent N+P+K
recovery in (Rice)
Wheat yield
(t /ha)
Apparent N+P+K
recovery(wheat)
T1- Control 1.78 - 1.71 -
T2- Farmers
practice (N100,P40,K0)
3.56 - 2.70 -
T3- 100% NPKZn (STR-Soil
test recommendation
4.62 69.1 3.01 60.0
T4- T3 + Farm yard manure
(FYM) @ 5 t/ ha
5.00 84.6 3.21 67.2
T5- T3 + pressmud @ 5 t/ ha 5.29 91.1 3.31 69.1
T6- T3+ NADEP compost @ 5 t/
ha
5.21 91.0 3.26 72.4
T3+FYM@5t/ ha+ PSB+BGA
/Azotobacter
5.36 95.4 3.35 76.4
LSD(P=0.05) 0.23 - 0.16 -
Mishra et al ,
Kanpur(2013)
pH 9.3, (EC) 0.68 dS /m, (OC) 3.8 g kg, (ESP) 33.2, gypsum
requirement(GR) 10.75 t/ ha, available N 128 kg/ ha, available P
18.7 kg/ha, available K 270 kg/ ha

17. Nitrification inhibitors in agriculture.
Name
(chemical,
trademark)
Solubility in water
(g/l)
Relative
volatility
Mode of
application
2-chloro-6-
(trichloromethyl)
pyridine
(Nitrapyrin;
N-serve)
0.04
(at 20°C)
High Suitable with
anhydrous
ammonia
for soil injection
2-amino-4-chloro
methyl
pyrimidine
1.25
(at 20°C)
High Coatings on solid
nitrogen
fertilizers
Dicyandiamide
(DCD),
cyanoguanidine
23.0
(at 13°C)
Low Blend with urea or
other solid
nitrogen fertilizers
DMPP Low Blend with urea or
other solid
nitrogen fertilizers
Subbarao et al., 2006

18. Influence of Natural and Synthetic Nitrification Inhibitors on Grain and Straw
Yield of Wheat, total nitrogen uptake and total apparent recovery
Treatment. Straw
yield
Grain
yield(t/ha)
Available
N(kg/ha) after
wheat
harvesting
Total Nitrogen
Uptake(kg/ha
)
Total Apparent N
recovery(%)
B: C
Ratio
Control 7.51 3.3 133.07 114.17 - -
Urea(200 kg/ha)* 9.11 3.8 137.87 159.73 22.78 -
Urea +DMO* (1.00%) 10.00 5.12 148.99 208.19 47.02 20.79
Urea +M. spicata oil
(1.00%)
9.91 4.34 153.85 191.54 38.68 2.69
Urea +Terpenes
(1.00%)
9.15 3.89 147.29 160.6 23.34 0.94
Urea+ DCD (1.00%) 9.2 3.95 158.21 180.88 33.13 0.29
CD(5%) 0.08 0.57 13.10 11.16 - -
*DMO- Dementholized oil
Soil pH 8.5, N(168),K(107),P(12.80) kg/ha . Var- HD 2329
*Applied at 0,24 &92 DAS. P& K@60 kg/ha by SSP & MOP as basal.
Kiran et al,1998 CIMAP ,
Lucknow 18

19. Method of Application
(Patakh et al., 2003)
Underuse
19

20. Deep Placement of Urea
Supergranules
• Reduces expenditures for urea by 20%-25%.
• Increases paddy yields by 15%-25%.
• Encourages algal biological nitrogen fixation
because of low flood water nitrogen
concentration.
• Reduces phosphorus runoff when urea-
diammonium phosphate is deep placed.
• Ensures nitrogen availability beyond the
flowering stage when applied at an appropriate
rate
IFDC—International Center for Soil
Fertility and Agricultural Development
20

21. Production of Urea Super granules(USG)
Prilled Urea(1-2 mm)
Briquetting Machine for USG
USG( 1-3 grams/particle) 21

22. Effect of different methods of urea fertilizer
application on the yield of Rice.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
T-1 T-2 T-3 T-4
NUE(%)
Yield(q/ha)
Soil pH6.1, OM(1.1%),N(0.145%),P(3.8ppm),K(0.12%)
T1-control
T 2-58kgN/ha by Urea
T 3-58kg N/ha by USG
T4-58 kg/ha by NPK briquettes
All the treatments received 16 kg P and 42 kg K ha-1 from TSP and MOP,
respectively
Boro rice cv. BRRI dhan 27
Hossain et al 2009
Dhaka.
22

23. Effect of different methods of phosphorus application
in wheat
P levels (kg/ha) Grain yield(t/ha) PUE(%)
0 2.10d -
61 3.27c 10.78a
104 4.06a 10.22b
140 3.80b 9.90b
LSD(P=0.05) 0.16 0.37
P application method
Band placement 3.74 8.48a
broadcast 3.64 6.67b
LSD(P=0.05) 0.11 0.26
23
pH 7.8, organic matter 0.8%, Olsen P 7.7 mg/ g and Extractable K 140 mg/ g. Computed
levels of P along with 130 kg N and 65 kg K /ha were applied using triple super phosphate
(TSP), urea and sulphate of potash (SOP), respectively as sources.
Hussain et al Pakistan(2012)

24. Effect of Different Sources Of Nutrient on Nitrogen use
efficiency of Rice
Treatments Grain yield(t/ha) Nitrogen Use efficiency
2009 2010 mean 2009 2010
T1: 50 % RDFN + cane trash vermi compost
@ 2.5 t ha/1
4.4 5.2 4.80 33.5 40.0
T2: 75 % RDFN + paddy straw
vermicompost@ 2.5 t ha/1
4.8 5.5 5.15 38.4 42.9
T3: 50 % RDFN + paddy straw
vermicompost @ 2.5 t ha/1
4.3 5.0 4.65 30.7 35.9
T4: 100 % chemical fertilizers 4.6 4.8 4.70 33.1 34.0
T5 : Absolute control 2.8 2.4 2.60 - -
CD 0.38 0.44 0.42
Rao et al, 2012 ANGRAU Hyderabad
pH 7.22),OC(0.51%),Available
N(241kg/ha),Available P(27 kg/ha),Available
K(309kg/ha)
24

25. Effect of Nano Fertilizers on Wheat Nutrient Use
efficiency
Treatment Recovery Efficiency(%) Agronomic Efficiency(kg
grain/kg nutrient
applied)
Grain
yield(Q/ha)
Control N P K N P K 12
50% RDF 88.3 32.3 340.5 33 83 125 37
100%RDF 61.6 32.8 218.0 22 55 83 45
125%RDF 45.7 27.3 184.7 19 48 72 48
50%RDF+NM 104.8 43.3 380.5 39 97 145 41
100%RDF+N
M
42.5 22.7 153.0 19 47 70 40
CD(P=0.05) 14.4 3.4 13.4 5
Nanomaterials of gypsum and rock phosphate@
3kg/ha)soil application
Kumar et al (2014) Pantnagar
25

26. Increase in Growth, Productivity and Nutritional status of wheat and
enrichment in Soil fertility applied with organic matrix Entrapped urea
(OMUE)
Treatment Grain
yield(q/ha
)
Protein
(DM) %
Organic
carbon(%) after
harvesting
pH after
harvestin
g
Net input
cost(Rs)
Net profit(Rs) Soil
enrichme
nt
control 10 8.4 0.33 8.9 8500 6500 Very low
Urea(160 kg/ha)
at basal and
30DAT
38 9.6 0.31 8.6 10427 46573 low
OMEU(80
kg/ha)
40 9.9 0.35 8.2 10963 49037 high
Kumar et al,2012
Haryana
OC(0.33%),Total N(330 kg/ha),Available N(110),Available
P(20kg/ha),Available K(220Kg/ha).
Var-WH-711
OMEU-cow dung: Rice bran: Dried Neem powder : clay soil (1:1:1:1)
Urea: OMEU(1:2) immobilized with 25% saresh (20g/kg) used as binder.

27. Efficiency Of Different fertilizers Applied To Rice.
Treatment Grain yield(t/ha) AUE(%) Relative
Efficiency
T1-Control(No
fertilizer)
3.0 -
T2-PU 3.9 12.23 100
T3-NH4Cl 3.6 9.08 74
T4-(NH4)2SO4 4.0 13.82 113
T5-CAN 4.1 14.60 119
T6-USG 4.4 18.02 151
CD(P=0.05) 0.46 -
Soil pH 6.8, OC(0.31%), N(240 Kg/ha),P(12kg/ha),K(200kg/ha).
N,P,K applied@76,22,41.5Kg/ha.
PU, NH4Cl, (NH4)2SO4, CAN applied at TP(25%), Tillering(50%) and PI(25%).
USG(100%)@ 7DAT
Jena,1995 Phulbani (Odisha)
27

28. RECOVERY OF NITROGEN IN SORGHUM FROM DIFFERENT
FERTILIZERS
Treatment Dry matter(t/ha) N yield
(kg/ha)
N from soil
(kg/ha)
NUE(%)
Urea* 9.95 83 13 45
Ammonium
sulfate*
10.69 100 19 64
Potassium
nitrate*
11.0 96 23 76
CV 7 13 11 11
*Applied 60 kg N/ha.
OM(0.39%),total P(68 mg/kg),
Total N(123mg/kg).
Seyni et al ,1992 Niger

29. Effect of Nutrient Rate on NUE in Wheat
treatment Grain
yield(kg/ha)
Recovery Efficiency (RE=
kg nutrient
taken up per kg nutrient
applied.)N
Recovery
Efficiency P
Recovery
Efficiency
K
T1-NPK@100:50:50 1100 0.47 0.13 0.89
T2-NPK@120:60:60 1220 0.58 0.21 1.22
T3-NPK@150:75:75 1380 0.58 0.16 1.20
CD(P=0.05) 238 4.08 0.46 5.32
29
The available N, P and K are 122.3, 14.8 and
131.5 kg /ha respectively by Urea, SSP, MOP
respectively.
Var- PBW-363
BATTACHARYA et al BCKV,
WB(2014)

30. Effect of time of potassium application in sugarcane
treatments AE(%) Average crop
growth(g/m2/day)
T1-No potassium - 7.91b
T2-112kg at planting 215ab 9.61ab
T3- 112 kg at 90DAP 201b 9.31ab
T4-56kg at planting+56kg at
90DAP
227a 9.82ab
T5-168 at sowing 193c 10.61a
T6- 84 kg at sowing+ 84 kg at
90DAP
218ab 10.31a
30
Soil loam, OM(0.87%), Available N(0.005%),
Available P(7.5mg/kg), Available K(108mg/kg)
Seed rate@ 50000 ( 3 budded)
N and P2O5 @168 and 112 kg/ ha by Urea & SSP.
Full P+ 1/3 N as basal.
Remaining N @45& 95DAP.
Mudasir et al
Pakistan (2013)

31. Effect of application time of fertilizer on maize
Treatment application YIELD(t/ha) Nutrient Recovery (%)
N P K
T1-Cotrol(No fertilizer) 0.44d - -- -
T2-Basal+ N @86.5 Kg/ha at 32DAE 4.63c 29.6 71.0 149
T4-Split 3 times at basal(20%),
30DAE(40%),50DAE(40%).
7.70a 42.3 82.2 204
T5-Split 4 times equal splits
@basal(20%),30(40%),40(40%),& 60(20%)DAE.
7.31a 42.1 83.9 214
31
Soil loamy sand , N(130mg/kg),P(5.2mg/kg),K(43.8mg/kg)
T2-basal application @28 kg N,12.2 kg P and 23.3 kg K /ha.
Bell et al Thailand 2009

32. Plant Based
Interventions
32

33. Effect of seedlings age and plant spacing on growth, yield, nutrient uptake and
economics of rice under system of rice intensification.
Treatment Grain
yield(t/ha)
N uptake(kg/ha) P
uptake(kg/ha)
K
uptake(kg/ha
)
B:C Ratio
Spacing
25* 25 cm 7.32 122.3 35.7 155.1 1.59
30*30 cm 6.52 112.7 32.5 142.6 1.37
CD(P=0.05) 4 4.1 1.3 4.7 0.1
Transplanting
Time(days)
8 6.64 112.1 32.9 145.5 1.36
10 7.49 126.3 35.9 156.3 1.67
12 7.17 122.9 35.4 152.6 1.56
14 6.37 108.7 32.1 140.9 1.31
CD(P=0.05) 0.19 4.1 1.2 4.1 0.07
Singh et al 2014, BHU
sandy clay loam, OM(0.42%), N(197 kg/ha),
Phosphorus(23kg/ha),potassium(207 kg/ha)
1.0: 0.5: 0.5: kg/100 m2 NPK

34. Efficiency of Applied Nutrients in Hybrid Maize Under Drip Fertigation
Treatments AE(kg grain/kg nutrient) Nutrient uptake at harvest (Kg/ha)
N P K N P K
T1-100% RDF once in 6 days 20.7 40.7 40.7 220.8 25.2 232.9
T2-100% RDF once in 12 days 18.8 37.7 37.7 212.7 25.1 226.6
T3-100% RDF Once in 15 days 18.5 37.1 37.1 209.5 25.2 226.4
T4-150% once in 6 days 18.2 36.4 36.4 243.7 28.9 263.0
T5-150% once in 12 days 17.3 34.6 34.5 241 28.8 260.5
T6-150% RDF once in 15 day 17.0 33.9 33.9 236.4 28.7 252.5
T7- 100% RDF with surface
irrigation
11.6 23.1 23.1 171.2 20.2 178.5
T8- CONTROL(NO FERTILZER) 0 0 0 126.9 11.6 132.4
CD(P=0.05) NOT
ANALYSED
14.1 2.8 16.1
sandy clay loam, NPK(232,18.6 & 445 kg/ha)Paired row 120+30*20
cm. seed rate 20kg/ha,RDF@150:75:75 with urea and potash with
Fertigation @ 25:50:25% NK at 6-30,30-60 ,60-90DAS respectively
Sampath kumar,TNAU
,2010
34

35. Nitrogen and irrigation effects on water use efficiency and
nitrogen use efficiency in wheat under sandy loam soil
Irrigation (mm) NUE
N Rate (kg/ha)
WUE
N Rate(kg/ha)
40 80 120 0 40 80 120
0 8.5 5.5 1.5 5.3 7.6 8.1 6.0
50 20.2 18.4 17.8 6.3 9.5 11.3 13.3
150 33.2 25.4 18.0 5.7 10.3 11.9 11.8
300 30.2 30.3 23.7 4.6 7.4 9.5 10.2
Bhale et al. (2009)

36. Effects pre- sowing seed treatment on growth, yield and nutrient uptake of Indian
Mustard under Rained conditions.
treatment Field
emergence(%)
Plant
height(cm)
Seed yield(kg/ha) Nutrient(Kg/ha) uptake
N P K
T1- Control 72.1 119.86 616 20 6.25 40.68
T2-water soaking 75.9 120.2 703 23 7.09 43.57
T3-1% K2SO4 77.1 119.84 726 25 7.89 44.96
T4-1% KCl 79.4 120.32 720 25 7.87 44.76
T5-1% KH2PO4 82.7 121.23 768 27 8.05 47.06
T6-
0.25%Na2HPO4
84.0 123.34 805 29 8.78 48.86
T7-Dithanae M-45 86.2 125.54 825 31 8.94 50.02
CD(P=0.05) 4.1 NS 86 3.36 0.94 2.69
• Var- B 85,
• Soil –alluvial under sub-humid sub tropics
• Soil fertility- 0.05%, 6.68kg, 43 kg/ha.
• NPK@40,4.5,8.5 kg/ha
Acharaya et al , Kalyani (WB)2 004
36

37. Method of sowing under saline conditions
treatment Yield(t/ha)
Maize(Ganga-5) Wheat (Sarbati Sonora)
Flat sowing 0.93 2.19
Sowing on side of ridges 1.85 2.51
Sowing in furrow 1.19 2.52
37
In a saline/alkali soil (EC 4.8 dS/m, ESP 55) S K Gupta Kanpur(2015)

38. Inter cropping for improving nutrient use efficiency
Intercropping Remarks
Maize+ Peanut Maize improved iron nutrition of peanut
phytosiderphore released from maize roots
may mobilize Fe(III) and benefit the iron
nutrition of peanut plant.
Chick pea+ Wheat Chickpea-facilitated P nutrition in associated
wheat chickpea can mobilize and absorb some
organic P by releasing phosphatase into soil.
Faba bean/maize
intercropping.
Intercropping reduced nitrate accumulation in
soil Profile .The decrease was about 0–41% for
wheat and 0–31% for Faba bean.
38

39. Legume based
Interactions between inter-cropped legumes and cereals
P-deficient intercropping system
39
Decrease in the soil pH from 6.5 to
4.1 can result in10-fold increase in
the P released into soil solution
-Li et al., 2007
Maize Faber bean
Zhang et al., 2010

40. Crop residue management
40

41. (1) N doses are in kg/ha. The succeeding wheat crop received 30 kg N/ ha.
Both rice and wheat received 20 kg P/ ha as single super phosphate and 30 kg K / ha as
murate of potash
Treatments Amount
applied(Mg/
ha)
Amount of NPK
added/recycled(kg/ha/y
r)
Grain yield (Mg/ha) under
different doses of Nitrogen
applied to rice(1)
N P K 0 40 60 120
Sesbania green manure 5.5 143 22 121 8.1 8.9 9.3 9..3
Cowpea green manure 3.5 59.5 15.7 25.2 7.9 8.9 9.2 9.4
Mungbean residues
(after picking pods)
1.9 28.9 4.0 14.1 8.2 8.5 8.8 9.1
Control 0 0 0 0 6.3 7.7 7.7 8.1
FYM 10 42 25 52 7.8 8.6 8.6 9.3
CD(0.05) - - - - 0.3
Integrated effects of crop residues/organic manures and levels of N
on the total grain production of a Rice-wheat cropping system.
(Misra and Prasad ,2000)41

42. Effects of sources of phosphorus and bio fertilizers on productivity and profitability of
soybean -wheat system
Treatment Soybean grain
(S) yield(t/ha)
Wheat grain (W)
yield(t/ha)
Agronomic efficiency for Recovery Efficiency(%)
S W
T1- 1SP 2 4.5 24 42 26(soybean 31
T2-1RP 1.68 3.66 15 17 15 9.5
T3-PSB 1.57 3.73 - - - -
T4-VAM 1.51 3.57 - - - -
T5-0.5SP 1.78 3.94 37.5 58 36.5 39
T4- 0.5SP+PSB- 1.87 4.11 37.5 67.5 42.5 49.5
T6-0.5 SP+VAM 1.95 4.36 45 88 48.5 72
T7-0.5 SP+PSB+VAM 2.09 4.58 48 99.5 53 81
T8-0.5 RP 1.57 3.53 23 23 21.5 11.5
T9-0.5 RP+PSB 1.87 4.05 41.5 62 43 43
T11- 0.5 RP+PSB+VAM 2.07 4.31 51.5 78 55.5 57.5
Control 1.17 3.17 - - -
CD 0.15 0.39
Mahanta et al
IARI, 2008
Sandy loam, 0.58% organic C ,pH8.36,Available N (149.4 kg/ha), Available P (13.8 kg/ha) available K
(140.2 kg/ha
PSB@500g, VAM@5kg , N (30 kg N/ha for soybean and 120 kg N/ha for wheat)and K (33.2 kg/ha for
both soybean and wheat) as urea and murate of potash. Var-HD 2643 & PK 1042
42

43. 1.To establish
yield target – the
crop’s total
needs
2. Effective use of
existing nutrients
3. Fill deficit
between total
needs and
indigenous supply
Site-specific nutrient management (SSNM)
Feeding
Crop
atneeds!
“ Site-specific nutrient management
(SSNM) is the dynamic, field-specific
management of nutrients in a particular
cropping season to optimize the supply and
demand of nutrients according to their
differences in cycling through soil-plant
systems.”
(Dobermann and White, 1999)
43

44. LCC and SPAD Meter
 Simple leaf colour chart (LCC) is a simple
tool which is a proxy for leaf N is used as an
indicator of leaf colour.
 Leaf color intensity and leaf N status
 Right time of N application
Generally critical value for semi dwarf high
yielding varieties is 4.0. If the average value
fall below 4.0, top dress N fertilizer (20-30
kg/ha) to correct N deficiency
Benefits
 Reduce pest/disease pressure
 Reduce leakage into environment
 LCC saves nearly 26% fertilizer N
 Helps to synchronize N supply, crop demand
and enhance N use efficiency
44

45. Leaf colour chart (LCC) based N management in direct -
seeded rice
Treatment
Total N
applied
(kg/ha)
Grain
yield
(t/ha)
N uptake
(kg/ha)
RE
(%)
AE (kg
grain/
kg N
applied)
Control 0 3.05 68 - -
80 kg N/ha at 0, 20, 40 and 60 DAS 80 4.63 111 53.8 19.8
120 kg N/ha at 0, 20, 40 and 60 DAS 120 4.72 124 46.7 13.9
30 kg N/ha at LCC < 3
(at 25 and 50 DAS) with 20 kg
N/ha at 0 DAS
80 5.36 127 73.8 28.9
30 kg N/ha at LCC < 4
(at 25 and 41 DAS) with 20 kg
N/ha at 0 DAS
80 5.23 121 66.2 27.3
CD at 5% - 0.39 12.1 2.7 5.2
(Singh et al., 2008)PAU, Ludhiana 45

46. It uses active light source to
measure and determine N rate by
comparing it with a N rich strip
within the field
Benefits-
• Fast and precise optical sensing
• Reduce crop fertilizer costs
• Only apply nitrogen to plants
that need it
• Real time variable rate
fertilizer application
• Collect data during existing
farming operation
Green seeker
46

47. Treatment
Fertilizer N application (kg N /ha) Grain
yield
(t/ha)
Total N
uptake
(kg/ha)
AE (kg
grain
kg−1 N
applied)
RE(%)
Basal
at
sowing
CRI,1ST
irrigati
on
2nd
irrigatio
n
3rd
irrigatio
n
Total
1 0 0 0 1.89 39.2
2 75 75 150 4.56 138.3 17.8 66.1
3 80 0 25a 105 4.01 107.7 20.2 65.2
4 40 40 25a 105 4.24 115.5 22.4 72.7
5 80 0 37a 117 4.21 113.2 19.8 63.2
6 40 40 29a 109 4.47 112.0 23.7 66.8
CD at 5% 0.42 10.11 3.29 7.45
(Singh et al., 2011) Karnal
Evaluation of Green Seeker-based N management ( PBW 343)
Soil pH 8.2,OC(3.9%),
N total(0.64 g/kg),P(8.9mg/kg),K(12.2mg/kg)
AE (Agronomic efficiency of applied N) RE ( Recovery efficiency of applied N)
aGreenSeeker-guided N application

48. PERFORMANCE OF RICE AS AFFECTED BY FOLIAR APPLICATION OF
DIFFERENT K FERTILIZER SOURCES
Treatme
nts
No .Of
tillers
yield (t/ha) K Contents % K uptake Reco
very
%
Agronomic
Efficiency(kg
grain /kg
nutrient)
paddy straw paddy straw paddy straw
Control 10.29d 2784d 3909d 0.36d 1.45c 10.09d 56.78 - -
KCl 11.84c 3024c 4199c 0.42c 1.41d 12.77c 63.60 23 13.12
K2SO4 13.89a 3336a 4876a 0.50a 1.66a 16.74a 80.3 72.8 8.69
KNO3 12.67b 3150b 4518b 0.46b 1.58b 14.32b 71.49 45 5.66
Shahzad et al
2005 Pakistan
pH 7.4, OM (0.65%), N-N03(5.4 mg/kg),P(4.12 mg/kg),K(68.0 mg/kg)
The basal dose of N, P and Zn were applied @ 100, 50 and 10 kg/ ha as urea, SSP and ZnS04, respectively.
K sources @ 1.5% Solution at 30 and 45 DAT
Var-Basmati -385
K2SO4 produced more no of tillers
48

49. Improved nitrogen use efficiency due to interaction
with other nutrients
Crop and N
fertilization(kg/ha)
NUE(kg grain /kg N
applied)
Additional
fertilization(kg/ha)
NUE(kg grain/kg
applied N)
Wheat -120 20.3 + 90 kg S 25.9
Rice -120 21.6 +60 kg P 24.6
Corn -120 8.8 +60 kg P 13.6
Sorghum-120 11.7 +60 kg P 17.1
Sunflower-60 8.8 +30 kg P 12.6
Soybean-80 0 +0.4 kg Fe 9.0
Tobacco-224 0.9 +0.22 kg Mo 3.1
49
Aulakh and Mahli (2005)

50. Speciality fertilizers
crop Specialty fertilizer Concentratio
n(%)
No of
sprays
Stage of spraying
Rice polyfeed 1 1 Max tillering
Multi-K 1 1 Grain filling
Maize polyfeed 1 1 Knee high
Multi-K 1 1 Grain filling
soybean polyfeed 1 1 Max. vegetative
growth
sunflower polyfeed 0.5 1 Grain floret
cotton polyfeed 1 1 Square formation
Mung bean polyfeed 1 1 Pod development
Polyfeed NPK Blend 19-19-19
MULTI-K: Potassium Nitrate 13-00-46 50

51. Speciality fertilizers For foliar Spray
• MONO POTASSIUM PHOSHATE:
• Water soluble Phosphate as
P205(min.52%).
• Water soluble Potash as K2O(min.32%).
• sodium as NaCl (dry basis) max.0.025%.
• Moisture content max(0.5%).
• Spray Recommendations : 5-6 gm / Lit of
Water for Fruit Crops / Vegetables / Kharif
-Rabi Crops.
•Potassium Nitrate (NOP)
Nitrate Nitrogen (as NO3) 13 % min
• Water Soluble Potash (as K2O) 45 % min
•Sodium (as Na ) (Dry Basis) 1 % max.
•Matter Insoluble in water 0.05 % max
•Moisture Content 0.5 % max
•Spray Recommendations : 7-10 gm / Lit of
water for Fruit crops / Vegetables / Kharif -
Rabi crops.
51

52. Customized Fertilizers in INDIA
Crop Formulations( N:P:K: Zn/
N:P:K:S:Zn:B)
Geography
Wheat 10:18:25:3:0.5:0 Muzaffarnagar,Barielly,Bijnore,Hathras
, Pilibhit,Mathura, Meerut and Etah
Sugarcane 7:20:18:6:0.5:0 Moradabad, KR Nagar,
Farukhabad and Ferozabad
Paddy 8:15:15:0.5:0.15:0 GB Nagar, Ghaziabad, Rampur,
Shahjahanpur, Mainpuri and US
Bagar
Maize 20:0:15:0:0:0.2 Andhra Pradesh
Ground nut 15:15:15:9:0.5:0.2 Andhra Pradesh
Paddy 15:32:8:0.5,
18:33:7:0.5
Andhra Pradesh
Grapes, Sugarcane 10:20:10:5:2:0.5:0.3:0.2 Aurangabad, Nasik, Pune and
Ahmednagar
Rakshit et al IARI, 2012 52

53. Comparative evaluation of tools and strategies for enhancing
fertilizer N use efficiency
Tools/strategies Benefit
cost
Limitations
Site-specific N management High Has to be developed for
every Infrastructure
required.
Chlorophyll meter High Initial high cost
Leaf color chart Very high None
Controlled release fertilizers and
nitrification inhibitors
Low Lack of interest by
industry
53

54. Tools/strategies Benefit Cost limitation
fertilizer placement High Lack of equipment
Foliar N application High Lack of equipment, risk
Remote sensing tools Low Needs fine tuning
Precision farming
technology
High Needs fine tuning
Breeding strategies Medium Limited research effort
54

55. Measures to increase nutrient use efficiency
Measure Nutrient Increase in nutrient use
efficiency(%)
Split vs. single dose application N 15-20
Furrow placement vs. broadcast
application
PK 20-30
The incorporation of urea super
granules (USG) vs. split application
N 20
The foliar vs. basal application Micro-nutrients 15-20
Neem coated vs. prilled urea N 5-10
Preferential application of
phosphorus to wheat in rice-wheat
sequence
P 50
55

56. Probable Gains in Nutrient use
Efficiency in Future
Giller et al. 2004 56

57. Conclusion
• Widespread nutrient deficiencies and deteriorating soil health
are causes of low nutrient use efficiency, productivity &
profitability.
• Adoption of site-specific balanced and integrated nutrient
management involving major, secondary and micro nutrients, organic
manures, biofertilizer and amendments.
• Utilizing all indigenously available nutrient sources to reduce
dependence on imports.
• Developing new efficient fertilizer products/ approaches.
• Effective soil testing service to back up precise fertilizer use.
• Creating awareness amongst farmers on benefits of balanced
fertilization.
57

58. 58

59. 59