Mechanisms of nitrogen limitation affecting maize growth: a comparison of different modelling hypotheses
F. Y. Li A B D , P. D. Jamieson A , P. R. Johnstone A and A. J. Pearson CA New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research, Private Bag 4704, Christchurch, New Zealand.
B AgResearch – Grasslands, Private Bag 11008, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand.
C Foundation for Arable Research, PO Box 80, Lincoln, New Zealand.
D Corresponding author. Email: frank.li@agresearch.co.nz
Crop and Pasture Science 60(8) 738-752 https://doi.org/10.1071/CP08412
Submitted: 18 November 2008 Accepted: 27 May 2009 Published: 5 August 2009
Abstract
Two hypothetical mechanisms exist for quantifying crop nitrogen (N) demand and N-deficit effects on crop growth. The Critical N mechanism uses a critical N concentration, while the Leaf N mechanism distinguishes active N in leaves from the N elsewhere in shoots. These two mechanisms were implemented in parallel in a maize model (Amaize) to evaluate their adequacy in predicting crop growth and development. In the Leaf N mechanism, two approaches for quantifying N-deficit effects, by reducing green leaf area (GAI) or diluting specific leaf nitrogen (SLN), were also examined. The model-predicted plant biomass, grain yield, and N uptake were compared with measurements from 47 maize crops grown on 16 sites receiving different N fertiliser treatments. The results showed that model-predicted plant biomass, grain yield and N uptake were insensitive to the approaches used for quantifying N-deficit effects in the Leaf N mechanism. The model-predicted plant biomass, grain yield and N uptake using either N approach were significantly related to measurements (P < 0.01) but had considerable deviations (r2 = 0.66–0.69 for biomass, 0.50–0.54 for grain yield: 0.17–0.33 for N uptake). The linear fits of the predicted against measured values showed no significant difference (P > 0.1) among the three N approaches, with the Leaf N mechanism predicting smaller deviation than the Critical N mechanism. However, the Critical N mechanism was better in simulating plant growth dynamics in early plant growth stages. The Leaf N mechanism distinguished functional from structural N pools in plants, having a sound physiological base. The simulation using the Leaf N mechanism with both SLN dilution and GAI reduction for quantifying N-deficit effects was the best in predicting crop growth and yield.
Additional keywords: canopy development, Critical N concentration, green leaf area, specific leaf nitrogen, nitrogen uptake, simulation.
Acknowledgments
The development of the maize model was funded by the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology as part of the Land Use Change and Intensification program. The field experimentation was funded by the Sustainable Farming Fund (SFF), the Foundation for Arable Research (FAR), and FertResearch. We thank D. Wilson and A. Fletcher for their comments on the manuscript, and E. Meenken for assistance with statistical analysis.
Addiscott TM
(1977) A simple computer model for leaching in structured soil. Journal of Soil Science 28, 554–563.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
Amos B, Walters DT
(2006) Maize root biomass and rhizodeposited carbon: an analysis of the literature. Soil Science Society of America Journal 70, 1489–1503.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
Birch CJ,
Hammer GL, Rickert KG
(1998) Improved methods for predicting individual leaf area and leaf senescence in maize (Zea mays). Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 49, 249–262.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Caloin M, Yu O
(1984) Analysis of the time course of change in nitrogen content in Dactylis glomerata L. using a model of plant growth. Annals of Botany 54, 69–76.
|
CAS |
Colenne C,
Meynard JM,
Reau R,
Justes E, Merrien A
(1998) Determination of a critical nitrogen dilution curve for winter oilseed rape. Annals of Botany 81, 311–317.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Dardanelli JL,
Ritchie JT,
Calmon M,
Andriani JM, Collino DJ
(2004) An empirical model for root water uptake. Field Crops Research 87, 59–71.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gastal F, Lemaire G
(2002) N uptake and distribution in crops: an agronomical and ecophysiological perspective. Journal of Experimental Botany 53, 789–799.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
PubMed |
Greenwood DJ,
Gastal F,
Lemaire G,
Draycott A,
Millard P, Neeteson JJ
(1991) Growth rate and percentage N of field grown crops: theory and experiments. Annals of Botany 67, 181–190.
|
CAS |
Greenwood DJ,
Lemaire G,
Gosse G,
Cruz P,
Draycott A, Neeteson JJ
(1990) Declining in percentage N of C3 and C4 crops with increasing plant mass. Annals of Botany 66, 425–436.
|
CAS |
Greenwood DJ,
Rahn C,
Draycott A,
Vaidyanathan LV, Paterson C
(1996) Modelling and measurement of the effects of fertilizer-N and crop residue incorporation on N-dynamics in vegetable cropping. Soil Use and Management 12, 13–24.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hansen S,
Jensen HE,
Nielsen NE, Svendsen H
(1991) Simulation of nitrogen dynamics and biomass production in winter wheat using the Danish simulation model Daisy. Fertilizer Research 27, 245–259.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
Jamieson PD,
Martin RJ, Francis GS
(1995) Drought influence on grain yield of barley, wheat, and maize. New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science 23, 55–66.
Jamieson PD, Semenov MA
(2000) Modelling nitrogen uptake and redistribution in wheat. Field Crops Research 68, 21–29.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Jamieson PD,
Semenov MA,
Brooking IR, Francis GS
(1998) Sirius: a mechanistic model of wheat response to environmental variation. European Journal of Agronomy 8, 161–179.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Jeuffroy MH,
Ney B, Qurry A
(2002) Integrated physiological and agronomic modelling of N capture and use within the plant. Journal of Experimental Botany 53, 809–823.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
PubMed |
Justes E,
Mary B,
Meynard J-M,
Machet J-M, Thelier-Huche L
(1994) Determination of a critical nitrogen dilution curve for winter wheat crops. Annals of Botany 74, 397–407.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
Lemaire G, Salette J
(1984) Relation entre dynamique de croissance et dynamique de prélèvement d’azote pour un peuplement de graminées fourragères. I. Etude de l’effet du milieu. Agronomie 4, 423–430.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lemaire G,
van Oosterom E,
Jeuffroy M-H,
Gastal F, Massignam A
(2008) Crop species present different qualitative types of response to N deficiency during their vegetative growth. Field Crops Research 105, 253–265.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Li FY,
Jamieson PD, Pearson AJ
(2006) AmaizeN: developing a decision support tool to optimise nitrogen management of maize. Agronomy New Zealand 36, 61–70.
Miller MH,
Walker GK,
Tollenaar M, Alexander KG
(1989) Growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.) grown outdoors hydroponically and in soil. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 69, 295–302.
Muchow RC, Sinclair TR
(1994) Nitrogen response of leaf photosynthesis and canopy radiation use efficiency in field-grown maize and sorghum. Crop Science 34, 721–727.
Muchow RC,
Sinclair TR, Bennett JM
(1990) Temperature and solar radiation effects on potential maize yield across locations. Agronomy Journal 82, 338–343.
Novoa R, Loomis RS
(1981) Nitrogen and plant production. Plant and Soil 58, 177–204.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
Plénet D, Lemaire G
(2000) Relationships between dynamics of nitrogen uptake and dry matter accumulation in maize crops. Determination of critical N concentration. Plant and Soil 216, 65–82.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Porter JR
(1993) AFRCWHEAT2: A model of the growth and development of wheat incorporating responses to water and nitrogen. European Journal of Agronomy 2, 69–82.
Sinclair TR, Amir J
(1992) A model to assess nitrogen limitations on the growth and yield of spring wheat. Field Crops Research 30, 63–78.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sinclair TR,
Farias JR,
Neumaier N, Nepomuceno AL
(2003) Modeling nitrogen accumulation and use by soybean. Field Crops Research 81, 149–158.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sinclair TR, Horie T
(1989) Leaf nitrogen, photosynthesis, and crop radiation use efficiency: A review. Crop Science 29, 90–98.
Sinclair TR, Muchow RC
(1995) Effects of nitrogen supply on maize yield. I. Modelling physiological responses. Agronomy Journal 87, 632–641.
Stewart DW, Dwyer LM
(1999) Mathematical characterization of leaf shape and area of maize hybrids. Crop Science 39, 422–427.
Stockle C,
Donatelli M, Nelson R
(2003) CropSyst, a cropping systems simulation model. European Journal of Agronomy 18, 289–307.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Stone P,
Pearson A,
Sorensen I, Rogers B
(2003) Effects of row spacing and plant population on maize yield and quality. Agronomy New Zealand 30, 67–75.
Tedeschi LO
(2006) Assessment of the adequacy of mathematical models. Agricultural Systems 89, 225–247.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vos J, van der Putten PEL
(1998) Effects of nitrogen supply on leaf growth, leaf nitrogen economy and photosynthetic capacity in potato. Field Crops Research 59, 63–72.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vos J,
van der Putten PEL, Birch CJ
(2005) Effects of nitrogen supply on leaf appearance, leaf growth, leaf nitrogen economy and photosynthetic capacity in maize (Zea mays L.). Field Crops Research 93, 64–73.
Wilson DR,
Muchow RC, Murgatroyd CJ
(1995) Model analysis of temperature and solar radiation limitations to maize potential productivity in a cool climate. Field Crops Research 43, 1–18.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wolfe DW,
Henderson DW,
Hsiao TC, Alvino A
(1988) Interactive water and nitrogen effects on senescence of maize. 1. Leaf area duration, nitrogen distribution, and yield & 2. Photosynthetic decline and longevity of individual leaves. Agronomy Journal 80, 859–870.
Yang HS,
Dobermann A,
Lindquist JL,
Walters DT,
Arkebauer TJ, Cassman KG
(2004) Hybrid-maize—a maize simulation model that combines two crop modelling approaches. Field Crops Research 87, 131–154.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |