Cited by 232Agronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsLegume Nitrogen Fixing SymbiosisAgricultural Science and Fertilization

Relationships for estimating N 2 fixation in legumes: incidence for N balance of legume‐based cropping systems in Europe

Open access
Anglade, Juliette, Billen, Gilles, Garnier, Josette·2015·Ecosphere

Abstract

Management of nitrogen (N) inputs into agricultural systems is of increasing interest due to the intensive use of synthetic fertilizers in modern cash crop systems, which has caused considerable environmental damage, including nitrate contamination of surface and groundwater, eutrophication of coastal marine areas and emission of greenhouse gases. The use of legumes grown in rotations or intercropping is nowadays regarded as an alternative and sustainable way of introducing N into low‐input cropping systems. In order to develop a simple tool to assess biological nitrogen fixation (BNF) by legume pulse and forages within crop rotations, we conducted a systematic literature survey with a quantitative statistical analysis intended to define a robust relationship between measurable variables and N 2 fixation. We found highly significant correlations between total N accumulation in shoot matter and fixed N 2 in forage ( y = 0.79 x − 0.49) and grain ( y = 0.70 x + 1.01) legumes. Accurately estimating the contribution of belowground components is more difficult because of a lack of relevant studies. Properly assessing BNF is crucial to evaluate the possibility of diversified legume based cropping systems achieving a balance between inputs and outputs, thus ensuring both short‐term productivity and long‐term sustainability. For a typical nine‐year organic rotation in the Paris basin alternating legumes and cereals, the soil surface balance, calculated with the relationships obtained, indicated that N fluxes were balanced, leaving a surplus of only a few kg N/ha/yr, with legumes accounting for 86% of total N inputs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1890/es14-00353.1

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Anglade, J., Billen, G., & Garnier, J.
Affiliations
  • Milieux environnementaux, transferts et interactions dans les hydrosystèmes et les sols (FR)
  • Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
Corresponding author
Anglade, Juliette
Venue
Ecosphere
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-03
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
1-24
ISSN
2150-8925 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2005067119
Cited by
232
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 23 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
FWCI
44.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Ecosphere (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Agence Nationale de la Recherche
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Legume Nitrogen Fixing Symbiosis
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
Keywords
nitrogen fixation, Fabaceae, nitrogen balance, crop rotation, forage legumes, pulses, nitrogen accumulation, organic farming, nitrogen inputs, nitrogen fluxes, legume-cereal rotation, Paris Basin

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