The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Effects of N-fertilization on shoots and roots of rape (Brassica napus L.) and consequences for the soil matric potential
Abstract
The effect of increasing rates of 15N-labelled Ca(NO3)2 (N0 = no N application, N300 = 300 mg N/pot; N600 = 600 mg N/pot; N900 = 900 mg N/pot) on recovery of fertilizer N in winter wheat plants and soil (total soil N, soil microbial biomass N [Nmic], extractable organic N [Norg]) and on N mineralization (NMsoil) was investigated at milk-ripe growth stage in a pot experiment. The N rates were equally split at tillering, stem elongation and ear emergence. Fertilizer N recovered in crops increased with increasing N rates (N300: 223.5 mg N/pot [74.5% of applied fertilizer N], N600: 445.6 mg N/pot [74.3%], N900: 722.1 mg N/pot [80.2%]). NMsoil slightly increased from N0 (43.8 mg N/pot) to N900 (75.6 mg N/pot) indicating that N application enhanced availability of soil-derived N for the plants. However, in fertilized treatments NMsoil is balanced by immobilization and losses (non-recovered fertilizer N). Therefore the effective soil N mineralization is indicated by apparent net N mineralization (ANNM = NMsoil — fertilizer N immobilization — lost fertilizer N). Fertilizer N immobilization in soil increased from N300 (38.7 mg N/pot) to N600 (60.7 mg N/pot) and N900 (65.5 mg N/pot). Lost fertilizer N increased from N300 (14.8 mg N/pot) to N600 (56.7 mg N/pot) and N900 (62.1 mg N/pot). As a consequence negative ANNM values were calculated at N600 and N900. Due to the small differences between N600 and N900 fertilizer N immobilization and lost fertilizer N did not increase linearly with increasing N rates, i.e. both processes were limited by factors other than N rate. Only 5.6—7.4% of the immobilized fertilizer N was recovered in Norg and 5.4—9.3% in Nmic soil pools. It is assumed that most of the immobilized fertilizer N was in non-extractable organic N forms. Nmic and Norg were weak indicators for the extent of fertilizer N immobilization.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Apart from its direct effect on grain yield and aboveground biomass production, water supply also interacts with N supply to enhance NUE by optimizing crop N uptake [32].”
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Plant- or microbial-derived? A review on the molecular composition of stabilized soil organic matter
Angst, G., Mueller, K. E., Nierop, K. G. J., & Simpson, M. J. (2021) · Soil Biology and Biochemistry · doi:10.1016/j.soilbio.2021.108189 · Cited by 1,196
Soil- and plant-based nitrogen-fertilizer recommendations in arable farming
Olfs, H., Blankenau, K., Brentrup, F., Jasper, J., Link, A., & Lammel, J. (2005) · Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science · doi:10.1002/jpln.200520526 · Cited by 238
The mobility and bioavailability of trace metals in tropical soils: a review
Rieuwerts, J. S. (2007) · Chemical Speciation & Bioavailability · doi:10.3184/095422907x211918 · Cited by 165
A Review of Fine Root Dynamics in Populus Plantations
Block, R. M. A., Van Rees, K. C. J., & Knight, J. D. (2006) · Agroforestry Systems · doi:10.1007/s10457-005-2002-7 · Cited by 129
Foulon, J., Zappelini, C., Durand, A., Valot, B., Blaudez, D., & Chalot, M. (2016) · FEMS Microbiology Ecology · doi:10.1093/femsec/fiw163 · Cited by 42
Metadata
- Authors
- Kappen, L., Schultz, G., Gruler, T., & Widmoser, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science
- Published
- 2000
- References
- 0
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effects of N-fertilization on shoots and roots of rape (Brassica napus L.) and consequences for the soil matric potential. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/1522-2624(200010)163:5
- The paper
- Kappen, L., Schultz, G., Gruler, T., & Widmoser, P. (2000). Effects of N-fertilization on shoots and roots of rape (Brassica napus L.) and consequences for the soil matric potential. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science. https://doi.org/10.1002/1522-2624(200010)163%3A5
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.