Skip to main content
PMC home page
Scientific Reports logoLink to Scientific Reports
. 2023 Aug 31;13:14287. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-40620-9

Effect of different NPK fertilization timing sequences management on soil-petiole system nutrient uptake and fertilizer utilization efficiency of drip irrigation cotton

Zhiqiang Dong 1,2,3, Yang Liu 1,3,✉, Minghua Li 1,3, Baoxia Ci 1, Xi Lu 1,3, Xiaokang Feng 1, Shuai Wen 1, Fuyu Ma 1,3,✉
PMCID: PMC10471573  PMID: 37652976

Abstract

In order to elucidate the effects of different nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), and potassium (K) fertilization timing sequences management on nutrient absorption and utilization in drip irrigation cotton, field experiments were conducted from 2020 to 2021. There are six timing sequences management methods for NPK fertilization (S1–S6: 1/3Time N–1/3Time PK–1/3Time W, 1/3Time PK–1/3Time N–1/3Time W, 1/2Time NPK–1/2Time W, 1/4Time W–1/4Time N–1/4Time PK–1/4Time W, 1/3Time W–1/3Time NPK–1/3Time W), among which S6 is the current management method for field fertilization timing sequences, and S7 is the non N. The results showed that during the main growth stage, S5 accumulated more nitrate nitrogen (NO3–-N) and ammonium nitrogen (NH4+-N) content in soil between 20 and 40 cm, and accumulated more available phosphorus content in soil between 5–15 cm and 15–25 cm, S5 reducing N leaching and increasing P mobility. It is recommended to change the timing sequences management method of NPK fertilization for drip irrigation cotton to 1/4Time W–1/4Time PK–1/4Time N–1/4Time W, which is beneficial for plant nutrient absorption and utilization while reducing environmental pollution.

Subject terms: Plant sciences, Plant ecology, Plant physiology

Xinjiang is located in the arid zone of northwest China, where water resources and irrigation for farmland are scarce1. Along with water scarcity, agricultural production is harmed by indiscriminately applying large amounts of fertilizers2, resulting in low fertilizer efficiency and serious environmental pollution3. Water and fertilizer are considered the most important factors affecting cotton yield and quality4, therefore, research on cotton fertilization and irrigation research have received widespread attention worldwide5,6.

Nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) are important nutrients for crop growths7,8. Although N fertilizer is the most demanded in crop production, the environmental pollution problem caused by excessive application of N fertilizer is also becoming more serious9. Research have shown that the current farmland N fertilizer utilization rate is only about 30%, due to various reasons such as excessive application of N fertilizer, unreasonable irrigation management methods, crop types and soil properties, as well as the volatile and easy leaching characteristics of N fertilizer, the loss rate of N fertilizer is high. The rest of the nitrate nitrogen (NO3–-N) residue in the soil10, surface residue (0–40 cm) N can still be next crop reuse, but because the NO3–-N is not easy to soil colloidal adsorption11, residual part in rainfall or diffuse irrigation conditions of deep leaching loss, NO3–-N leaching in farmland soil is one of the important ways of N fertilizer loss and the main source of groundwater pollution, becoming an increasingly serious environmental pollution factor12,13. Unlike N, P is easily fixed and adsorbed in the soil, thus greatly reducing the efficiency of P use14,15. Therefore, reducing N leaching, increasing the displacement distance of P in soil, and exploring reasonable fertilization methods to promote the full use of N and P are urgent problems to be solved at present16.

Drip irrigation17 is a modern water-saving irrigation technology with controllable irrigation and fertilizer application in terms of time, sequence and quantity18,19. It can directly supply water and fertilizer to the soil near the crop roots at the right time and amount according to the crop's demand at different growth stages20–22, reduced losses such as leaching and volatilization of fertilizers, and significantly improving the efficiency of water and fertilizer utilization22,23. By applying water and fertilizer coupling, synchronization of the role of promoting fertilizer transformation, conducive to crop absorption and utilization24,25, fertilizer management is more efficient26. In the current cotton production in Xinjiang, the drip irrigation system in the field is usually about 1/3 time of water in one irrigation process, followed by N, P and potassium (K) fertilizer solution, and finally about 1/3 time of water in the drip to flush the pipe network, but the effect of this drip irrigation system is not ideal26.

To address this issue, this study utilizes perfect high-efficiency and water-saving drip irrigation technology in Xinjiang. Using the advantages of drip irrigation in terms of controllable fertilization and irrigation timing sequences, six different fertilization timing sequences management of NPK were established. Explore the impact of different fertilization timing sequences management on nutrient absorption and fertilizer utilization efficiency in the soil petiole system, and find the optimal NPK fertilization timing sequences management method.

Materials and methods

Materials

The experiment was conducted in 2020–2021 at the teaching trial site of Shihezi University, Shihezi City, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region (44°18′N, 86°02′E). The cotton variety used in this study was Lumianyan 24, selected by Shandong Cotton Research Center, which is a medium-late maturing variety with a fertility period of about 130 days. Fertilization and weeding of plants in the present study complies with international, national and institutional guidelines.

Experimental design

The experiment was designed with six treatments (Table 1) with three replications randomized in completely zoned groups, planting pattern: 1 film, 3 rows and 3 strips, mulching, each plot 20 m long, row spacing 0.66 m. In all treatments (Table 1), S6 is the conventional drip irrigation (The drip irrigation is surface) fertilization timing sequences management and S7 is the treatment without N fertilization, where W denotes water drip, N denotes N drip, and PK denotes P and K drip. In which 1/3 time N–1/3 time PK–1/3 time W (S1), means the whole drip irrigation fertilization process, 1/3 of the total time of drip irrigation dripping N fertilizer solution first, followed by 1/3 of the total time of drip irrigation dripping P and K fertilizer solution, 1/3 of the total time of drip irrigation dripping water last, and the rest is the same. The application rates of N, P and K were 300 kg/ha, 109.8 kg/ha (P2O5) and 91.8 kg/ha (K2O), respectively. The types of fertilizers used as sources of N, P and K were urea, KH2PO4 and K2SO4, all of them are special fertilizer for drip irrigation with excellent water solubility. Eight (2020) and nine (2021) times during the cotton growth stages, with the ratio of 2:8 for N fertilizer and 3:7 for P and K fertilizer between bud stage (BS) and flowering and bolling stage (FABS), and the total amount of N, P and K fertilizer applied in a single application was the same for each plot (Table 2). The total amount of N, P and K fertilizer was the same for each plot.

Table 1.

NPK fertilization timing sequences.

Processing number Fertilization timing sequences
S1 1/3Time N–1/3Time PK–1/3Time W
S2 1/3Time PK–1/3Time N–1/3Time W
S3 1/2Time NPK–1/2Time W
S4 1/4Time W–1/4Time N–1/4Time PK–1/4Time W
S5 1/4Time W–1/4Time PK–1/4Time N–1/4Time W
S6 (CK) 1/3Time W–1/3Time NPK–1/3Time W
S7 1/3Time W–1/3Time PK–1/3Time W
Open in a new tab

Table 2.

Fertilization proportion.

Date Order Fertilization%
N% P2O5% K2O%
2020 4–22 1 – – –
6–08 2 10.0 15.0 15.0
6–17 3 10.0 15.0 15.0
6–27 4 13.3 11.7 11.7
7–08 5 13.3 11.7 11.7
7–18 6 13.3 11.7 11.7
7–24 7 13.3 11.7 11.7
8–02 8 13.3 11.7 11.7
8–12 9 13.3 11.7 11.7
8–20 10 – – –
Total 100 100 100
2021 4–27 1 – – –
6–11 2 6.7 10.0 10.0
6–20 3 6.7 10.0 10.0
6–27 4 6.7 10.0 10.0
7–04 5 13.3 11.7 11.7
7–11 6 13.3 11.7 11.7
7–18 7 13.3 11.7 11.7
7–28 8 13.3 11.7 11.7
8–08 9 13.3 11.7 11.7
8–15 10 13.3 11.7 11.7
8–22 11 – – –
Total 100 100 100
Open in a new tab

Determination of NO3–N, NH4+-N and AP content in soils

Soil samples were collected under the drip irrigation belt and between the planting rows at the full bud stage (FBS), full flowering stage (FFS), peak boll stage (PBS) and boll opening stage (BOS) of cotton, respectively, and soil NO3–-N and ammonium nitrogen (NH4+-N) were measured at depths of 0–20 cm, 20–40 cm and 40–60 cm. Soil available phosphorus (AP) was measured at sampling depths of 0–5 cm, 5–15 cm, and 15–25 cm.

Determination of NO3–-N and NH4+-N in soil: The samples were collected and stored immediately on ice. Before measurement, thaw the sample. Immediately after thawing, thoroughly mix the sample through a 2 mm sieve, weigh 5 g of soil sample, add 50 mL of 2 mol/L KCl solution, shake for 30 min, and filter. The extract is immediately frozen and stored. The extracts were thawed before measurement, and the NO3–-N and NH4+-N contents of the soils were determined using a flow analyzer.

Determination of NO3–-N and PO43–-P content in petioles

Since a large number of petioles need to be removed to test the nutrient content of cotton petioles, the plot area was divided into two parts in the ratio of 3:2, where 3/5 plot area (SCA1) was used for plant sampling, and 2/5 plot area (SCA2) was used for petiole sampling.

Sampling is generally carried out on sunny days from 12:00 to 14:00. Cotton metabolism is in dynamic equilibrium during this period, and the stored NO3–N, inorganic phosphorus (PO43–-P) content in the body best reflects the relative relationship between nutrient uptake and assimilation. The content of NO3–N, PO43–-P in cotton petiole is relatively stable, which can reflect the authenticity of nutrient content in cotton petiole during the important reproductive period of cotton.

Ten petioles with leaves were collected at fixed points in each SCA2 plot, and their leaves were removed leaving only the petioles. The samples were washed with distilled water, and the petioles and leaves were separated. The petioles were cut and pressed. The contents of NO3–-N in cotton petioles were determined using LAQUA Twin NO3- meter and K+ meter (HORIBA Inc., Japan), while the PO43–-P content was determined using RQflex20 Reflectoquant (Merck Inc., Germany).

Plant N content and yield determination

Three uniformly growing cotton plants were taken from each SCA1 plot and broken down into three parts: leaves, stems and reproductive organs from above the cotyledons. The dried cotton stems, leaves and reproductive organs were crushed and passed through 0.5 mm sieve. The N content of each organ was determined by the Kjeldahl method using sulfuric acid digestion.

The number of harvested plants and the number of spatted bolls in an area of 3 m × 2.28 m were counted in each plot selected for 3 m length during the harvesting period, after which 50 spatted bolls were harvested in each plot, weighed and the single boll weight was calculated. The seed cotton yield was obtained according to the yield calculation formula.

Data processing

Significance of elements under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management was evaluated by using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan test. Significance was reported at P < 0.05 level. All data were analyzed with SPSS 27.0 statistical software (SPSS, Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) and the graphs were drawn by using Origin 2018 (Origin Lab Corporation, Northampton USA).

N recovery efficiency27 (NRE%) = (N uptake in N application area − N uptake in no N application area)/N application.

N fertilizer agronomic utilization efficiency28 (aNUE kg kg−1) = (Yield in N application area − Yield in no N application area)/N application.

Fertilizer Partial productivity28 (FPP kg kg−1) = Yield/Fertilizer input.

Results

Effect of different NPK fertilization timing management on N uptake in soil-petiole system

The effect of different NPK fertilization timing sequences management on the NO3–-N content of different soil layers under cotton is shown in Table 4. With the change of the cotton growth period, the soil NO3–-N content of each treatment decreased rapidly at the FBS, increased again at the FFS, was relatively low at the PBS, and increased slightly at the BOS. Soil NO3–-N content was more depleted during the FBS and PBS, and the overall soil NO3–-N content in 2021 was slightly higher than that in 2020.

Table 4.

Significance of NH4+-N content in different soil layers under different fertilization timing sequences in 2020–2021.

Growth stage Soil depth 2020 Soil NH4+-N content (mg/kg) 2021 Soil NH4+-N content (mg/kg)
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
FBS 0–20 6.32b 6.74a 6.41b 6.24b 6.34b 6.79a 4.22c 7.09e 8.87a 6.85e 7.35d 7.90c 8.43b 6.33f
20–40 5.77a 5.68ab 5.66abc 5.27d 5.42bcd 5.39cd 4.07e 6.83b 6.33cd 6.77b 6.58bc 7.51a 7.33a 6.08d
40–60 5.40ab 4.47d 4.98c 5.66a 4.29de 5.22bc 3.97e 6.80a 6.18b 6.67a 6.38ab 6.41ab 6.11b 5.45c
FFS 0–20 7.32d 8.19b 7.15d 7.81c 8.02bc 8.72a 6.31e 9.62c 10.81a 9.38c 10.04b 10.11b 10.29b 8.39d
20–40 6.30d 7.77b 7.75b 7.13c 8.27a 6.85c 5.97d 8.07d 9.17b 7.35e 8.29d 9.56a 8.82c 7.19e
40–60 7.39b 5.30d 7.83a 6.24c 6.02c 5.96c 5.05d 8.79ab 8.18c 8.95a 8.46bc 7.52d 8.25c 7.27d
PBS 0–20 4.55d 5.38b 4.73cd 4.93c 5.32b 6.25a 4.27e 6.95de 7.60b 6.77e 7.16cd 7.39bc 8.67a 6.24f
20–40 4.13b 4.32b 4.95a 4.87a 5.03a 3.34c 3.06c 6.43c 6.67c 6.28c 7.06b 7.88a 6.56c 5.57d
40–60 5.21a 4.21b 5.23a 4.35b 4.16b 3.35c 2.38d 7.74a 6.83c 7.95a 7.28b 6.25d 7.05bc 5.73e
BOS 0–20 8.04a 8.09a 7.95a 8.06a 8.07a 8.08a 7.82a 9.17bc 9.60ab 9.18bc 9.28ab 9.31ab 9.63a 8.84c
20–40 6.73c 6.92bc 7.16b 6.87bc 7.65a 6.38d 6.38d 8.12b 8.38b 7.61c 8.09b 9.23a 8.16b 7.61c
40–60 5.90a 5.93a 6.06a 5.99a 5.94a 5.78a 4.86b 8.64a 8.15b 8.69a 8.17b 7.97b 8.13b 7.08c
Open in a new tab

Different lowercase letters mean significant differences (P < 0.05) among the different fertilization timing sequence under the same soil layer. FBS, FFS, PBS and BOS represent full bud stage, full flower stage, peak boll stage and boll opening stage, respectively.

Under different NPK timing sequences management, the S1 and S3 showed a trend of increasing soil NO3–-N content with increasing the same soil depth. S4 showed the same trend as S1 and S3 at FBS (2021), FFS and PBS, while S2, S5 and S6 showed a higher concentration of soil NO3–-N in the 0–20 cm layer. S5 accumulates more in the 20–40 cm soil layer during all important growth stages.

The significance of soil NO3–-N content in different soil layers under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management was analyzed (Table 3). In the 20–40 cm soil layer, the overall performance of soil NO3–-N content is S5 > S2 > S6 > S4 > S3 > S1 > S7. The soil NO3–-N content of S5 is significantly higher than that of other treatments and significantly higher than that of other treatments. At the FFS, the soil NO3–-N content of S5 is 9.4% (2021) higher than that of S6 and 23.7% (2021) higher than that of S7. In 40-60 cm soil layer, the overall content of soil NO3–-N is S3 > S1 > S4 > S6 > S2 > S5 > S7. The content of soil NO3–-N in S3 and S1 is significantly higher than that in other treatments. In individual growth stages, the content of soil NO3–-N in S4 is also significantly higher than that in other treatments, except that it has no significant difference with S1 and S3. N application was significantly higher than no N application. The content of soil NO3–-N in each treatment had strong significance in FBS (except 2020), FFS and PBS, and decreased significantly among treatments at BOS.

Table 3.

Significance of NO3–-N content in different soil layers under different fertilization timing sequences in 2020–2021.

Growth stage Soil depth 2020 Soil NO3–-N content (mg/kg) 2021 Soil NO3–-N content (mg/kg)
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
FBS 0–20 16.44a 16.15a 17.17a 16.25a 15.85a 15.92a 14.47a 16.81d 18.31b 17.75c 18.11bc 19.10a 19.16a 15.93e
20–40 18.87a 19.15a 19.24a 19.40a 18.21a 18.58a 16.74a 20.29b 18.12d 18.40d 19.11c 21.31a 19.30c 17.25e
40–60 17.85a 16.42a 17.76a 16.53a 16.45a 16.34a 16.60a 20.33b 18.94d 21.49a 19.76c 17.37e 19.06d 16.14f
FFS 0–20 18.78de 19.53ab 18.49e 19.05cd 19.21bc 19.81a 17.37f 18.75bc 20.07a 19.26b 19.26b 20.50a 20.70a 17.55d
20–40 19.95d 21.28b 20.25d 20.85c 22.30a 21.24b 19.10e 20.43e 22.64b 20.77de 21.33cd 24.14a 22.07bc 19.51f
40–60 21.54b 19.01d 22.18a 20.31c 18.26e 19.22d 17.19f 22.72b 19.99d 23.43a 21.05c 19.20e 20.12d 18.04f
PBS 0–20 15.22d 16.20bc 15.13d 15.94c 16.58ab 16.71a 14.25e 15.84d 18.26a 15.28e 16.28cd 17.34b 18.64a 14.27f
20–40 16.84e 18.32ab 17.14de 17.66cd 18.81a 18.14bc 16.06f 17.13d 19.24b 17.28d 18.36c 20.66a 18.96b 16.48e
40–60 18.15a 16.89b 18.31a 17.92a 16.23c 17.24b 15.12d 20.33b 16.90d 21.34a 18.38c 16.37e 17.29d 15.16f
BOS 0–20 17.26b 17.68ab 17.15b 17.55ab 16.96b 18.00a 17.05b 17.98ab 18.94ab 18.31ab 18.75ab 18.92ab 19.04a 16.82b
20–40 18.58bc 19.67a 18.71b 19.20a 19.53a 19.33a 18.23c 20.77a 20.45a 20.98a 21.31a 21.42a 21.06a 18.44b
40–60 18.12b 17.62cd 18.83a 18.35b 17.51d 17.98bc 17.45d 20.41a 17.92b 21.02a 17.48b 17.22b 17.73b 16.75b
Open in a new tab

Different lowercase letters mean significant differences (P < 0.05) among the different fertilization timing sequence under the same soil layer.

The soil NH4+-N content showed a general trend of gradually decreasing with increasing soil depth under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management, but the soil NH4+-N content was significantly lower than the NO3–-N content.

The trend of soil NH4+-N content in each treatment under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management is shown in Table 4. S1 showed a trend of decreasing and then increasing soil NH4+-N content with increasing soil depth at the FFS and PBS, where the soil NH4+-N content peaked at 40–60 cm soil layer at the PBS, showing a trend of gradually deepening soil NH4+-N content with deepening soil layer. The S4 also showed a decreasing trend followed by an increasing trend in the FBS (2021), PBS (2021) and BOS (2021) stages. The NH4+-N content of soil in S2 was higher than that of other treatments except for S5, which showed a trend of increasing and then decreasing with the increase of soil depth in S5 at FFS and PBS stage (2021), and reached the peak in 20–40 cm soil layer.

The significance of soil NH4+-N content in different soil layers under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management was analyzed (Table 4). In the 0–20 cm soil layer, the soil NH4+-N content of the S6 was significantly higher than the other treatments and not significantly different from the S2 and S5. In the 20–40 cm soil layer, the soil NH4+-N content of S5 was significant with other treatments, and the S5 increased 6.4%-38.5% (2020) and 4.3%-33.0% (2021) compared with other treatments at the FFS, and 20.7% (2020) and 8.4% (2021) compared with S6 (CK), and S5 increased S2 had significantly higher soil NH4+-N content at FFS, PBS and BOS stages than the other treatments, except for the S5, which was lower than the S5. In the 40–60 cm soil layer, the soil NH4+-N content of S3 and S1 was significantly higher than the other treatments, and S4 was also significantly higher than the other treatments in individual growth stages, except that it was not significant with S1 and S3. The soil NH4+-N content was significantly higher in the N application than in the non-N application. The soil NH4+-N content of each treatment was highly significant at the FBS, FFS and PBS, and the difference between treatments decreased when the BOS was reached.

The petiole NO3–-N content of functional leaves of cotton showed a trend of gradual decrease with the advancement of the growth stages, reaching a maximum at the FBS and a minimum at the PBS (Fig. 1). 2020, under the management of different NPK fertilization timing sequences management, the petiole NO3–-N content at the FBS was S4 > S2 > S5 > S6 > S1 > S3 > S7, among which the difference between the petiole NO3–-N content of S2, S4, S5 and S6 was not significant. S2 and S4 were significantly higher than S1, S3 and S7, no difference between S1, S5 and S6, and significantly higher than S1, S3 and S7. The FFS showed S5 > S2 > S6 > S4 > S1 > S3 > S7, no significant difference between S2, S5 and S6 in petiole NO3–-N content, but all were significantly higher than other treatments, no significant difference between S1 and S4, difference between S1 and S3 was not significant, and all treatments were significantly higher than S7. At the PBS it showed S5 > S2 > S6 > S4 > S1 > S3 > S7. The NO3–-N content of petiole was significantly higher in S5 than in other treatments, the difference between S2, S4 and S6 was not significant, and the difference between S1 and S3 was not significant, but both were significantly higher than in S7.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Changes of NO3–-N content in petioles under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management in important growth stages in 2020–2021. Different letters indicated significant difference at 5% probability level in the same observation period.

Under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management in 2021, the petiole NO3–-N content at the bloom stage showed S5 > S2 > S4 > S6 > S1 > S3 > S7, among which the difference in petiole NO3–-N content among S2, S4 and S5 was not significant, and S5 was significantly higher than S1, S3, S6 and S7. The significant performance at the FFS and PBS stage was consistent with the trend in 2020.

Effect of different NPK fertilization timing management on P uptake in soil-petiole system

With the change of growth stage, the soil AP content was the highest at the FBS, decreased rapidly at the FFS, was the lowest at the PBS and increased at the BOS under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management. The soil AP content decreased gradually with the increase of soil depth from the FBS to the BOS. As with soil NO3–-N and NH4+-N, the overall soil AP content was higher in 2021 than in 2020.

The trend of soil AP content of each treatment under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management is shown in Table 5. S1, S3, S4 and S6 have more soil AP content aggregated in 0–5 cm. S5 has the highest content in 5–15 cm and 15–25 cm soil layer. The S5 had higher soil AP content at FFS (2020) and 15–25 cm soil layer at PBS than at 5–15 cm soil layer, while the S7 had lower soil AP content than the other treatments.

Table 5.

Significance of AP content in different soil layers under different fertilization timing sequences in 2020–2021.

Growth stage Soil depth 2020 Soil AP content (mg/kg) 2021 Soil AP content (mg/kg)
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7 S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6 S7
FBS 0–5 24.89bc 26.54a 26.84a 25.37b 24.36b 24.94bc 25.49b 28.81ab 27.11de 27.59cd 29.06a 26.91e 28.23bc 27.91c
5–15 22.33b 21.49cd 21.04d 21.89bc 22.88a 22.30b 21.14d 24.06bc 24.31b 23.88bcd 23.57d 25.11a 24.13bc 23.69cd
15–25 19.58b 18.74de 18.59e 19.10cd 20.57a 19.36bc 18.38e 20.85c 21.97b 21.59b 20.70c 22.75a 21.85b 20.92c
FFS 0–5 22.68ab 21.28de 21.58cde 22.88a 21.05e 22.14bc 21.81cd 24.77ab 24.14c 24.06c 25.11a 23.21d 23.75cd 24.26bc
5–15 17.95d 19.28b 18.25d 18.85c 20.34a 19.24b 17.10e 20.71cd 22.03ab 21.21c 20.63d 22.42a 21.79b 20.27d
15–25 17.42cd 18.49b 17.67c 16.75e 20.64a 18.03bc 16.99de 18.53cd 19.32b 18.82bc 18.17d 20.78a 19.23b 17.99d
PBS 0–5 20.69a 19.66c 20.50ab 20.82a 19.00d 19.24d 20.18b 22.91a 21.46d 22.72ab 23.04a 21.22d 21.88c 22.40b
5–15 17.78cd 18.32ab 17.14e 16.84e 18.74a 18.14bc 17.35de 18.58cd 20.21a 19.22bc 18.36d 20.03a 19.51ab 18.06d
15–25 16.67de 18.09b 17.14cd 16.37e 18.94a 17.53c 15.67f 17.56d 19.16b 18.42c 17.26d 20.58a 18.83bc 16.56e
BOS 0–5 22.90ab 22.49b 22.37b 23.23a 22.19b 22.78ab 22.27b 25.77ab 25.44ab 25.57ab 25.89a 24.89c 25.72ab 25.38b
5–15 20.87a 21.33a 20.38b 20.24bc 21.20a 20.99a 19.90c 23.09a 22.47bc 23.22a 22.60b 23.55a 23.42a 22.12c
15–25 20.06c 20.72b 20.42b 19.96c 21.52a 20.57b 19.86c 22.40de 23.16b 22.76cd 22.29e 23.87a 22.90bc 22.19e
AVE 0–5 22.79 22.49 22.82 23.08 21.65 22.28 22.44 25.57 24.54 24.99 25.78 24.058 24.90 24.99
5–15 19.73 20.11 19.20 19.46 20.79 20.17 18.87 21.61 22.26 21.88 21.29 22.78 22.21 21.04
15–25 18.43 19.01 18.46 18.05 20.42 18.87 17.73 19.84 20.90 20.40 19.61 22.00 20.70 19.42
Open in a new tab

Different lowercase letters mean significant differences (P < 0.05) among the different fertilization timing sequence under the same soil layer. FBS, FFS, PBS and BOS represent full bud stage, full flower stage, peak boll stage and boll opening stage, respectively. AP, AVE represent soil available phosphorus and the average value of soil AP content.

The significance of soil AP content in different soil layers under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management was analyzed (Table 5). In the 0–5 cm soil layer, the S4 was significantly higher than the other treatments at the FFS, PBS and BOS. In the 5–15 cm soil layer, the soil AP content of S5 was significant and highest compared with other treatments, and the average soil AP content of S5 increased by 3.1% (2020) and 2.6% (2021) compared with S6 (CK). In the 15–25 cm soil layer, the soil AP content of S5 was also significantly higher than the other treatments, and the soil AP content of S5 increased 11.6%–23.2% (2020) and 7.6%–15.5% (2021) compared with the other treatments at the FFS, and 20.7% (2020) and 8.4% (2021) compared with S6 (CK) at the bell bloom stage soil AP content increased by 4.7%–20.9% (2020), 7.4%–24.3% (2021) compared to other treatments and 8.0% (2020), 9.3% (2021) compared to S6 (CK).The average soil AP content increased by 8.2% (2020), 6.3% (2021) in S5 compared to S6 (CK). S5 significantly enhanced the mobility of soil phosphorus to deeper soil layers.

The trend of PO43–-P content of cotton petioles under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management is shown in Fig. 2, which shows a trend of increasing and then decreasing as the growth stage progresses, reaching a maximum at the FFS and a minimum at the FBS. In 2020, at FBS, petiole PO43–-P content was significantly higher in S5 than in other treatments, and S2 was also significantly higher than in other treatments. The difference between S4 and S6 was not significant, and the difference between S1 and S4 was not significant. S6 was significantly higher than S1, S3 and S7, and there was no significant difference between S1, S3 and S7. At FFS, petiole PO43–-P content was significantly higher in S5 than in other treatments, and S2 was significantly higher than in other treatments, except no significant difference between S1, S3 and S4, and all treatments were significantly higher than in S7. At PBS, petiole PO43–-P content was significantly higher in the S5 than in the other treatments, S2 was significantly higher than in the other treatments, except for no significant difference with the S6, all were significantly higher than in the other treatments, S1, S3 and S4 were not significantly different from each other, and all were significantly higher than in S7. All treatments were significantly higher than the S7.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Changes of PO43–-P content in petioles under different NPK fertilization timing sequences management in important growth stages in 2020–2021. Different letters indicated significant difference at 5% probability level in the same observation period.

In 2021, at FBS, the trend of PO43–-P content of petiole was the same as in 2020, except that S1 and S3 had significantly higher PO43–-P content than S7. At FFS, S5 had significantly higher PO43–-P content of petiole than other treatments, except for no significant difference with S2. S6 were not significantly different from each other, and all treatments were significantly higher than S7. At the PBS, the PO43–-P content of petiole of S5 was significantly higher than other treatments except for no significant difference with S2. There was no significant difference between S2, S4 and S6, but S2 and S6 were significantly higher than S1, S3 and S7. The difference between S1 and S4 was not significant, and the difference between S1 and S3 was not significant. All treatments were significantly higher than S7.

Effect of different NPK fertilizer fertilization timing sequences management on fertilizer utilization efficiency

Different NPK fertilizer fertilization timing sequences management significantly affected fertilizer utilization efficiency (Table 6). 2020, N fertilizer recovery efficiency (NRE) under different NPK fertilizer fertilization timing sequences management showed S5 > S2 > S6 > S4 > S1 > S3, where NRE under S5 was significantly highest among the other treatments, the difference between S2, S4 and S6 was not significant, S2 and S6 were significantly higher than S1 and S3. The difference between S4 and S1 was not significant but significantly higher than S3, and the difference between S1 and S3 was not significant. N fertilizer agronomic utilization efficiency (aNUE) was significantly higher in S5 followed by S2 which was also significantly higher than other treatments. The difference between S4 and S6 was not significant and S6 was significantly higher than S1 and S3. In terms of fertilizer partial productivity (FPP) significance, S5 was significantly higher than the other treatments, and S2 was also significantly higher than the other treatments, except for no significant difference with S5. NRE was 58.5% and 24.0% higher and aNUE was 55.9 and 76.6% higher under S5 compared to S6 (CK).

Table 6.

Fertilizer utilization efficiency as influenced by different NPK fertilization timing sequences management in 2020–2021.

Year Treatment number NRE% aNUE (kg kg−1) PPF (kg kg−1)
2020 S1 17.0cd 1.64de 10.96e
S2 28.8b 3.12b 11.85b
S3 12.3d 1.40e 10.82e
S4 21.1bc 2.03cd 11.19d
S5 40.9a 3.71a 12.20a
S6 25.8b 2.38c 11.40c
S7 – – 9.98f
2021 S1 23.1bc 1.80c 10.89d
S2 34.6a 3.40b 12.15b
S3 15.1c 1.52c 10.76d
S4 28.0b 2.05c 11.14d
S5 42.9a 4.45a 12.77a
S6 27.0bc 2.52bc 11.62c
S7 – – 10.11e
Open in a new tab

Different letters indicated significant difference at 5% probability level.

Discussion

The distribution law of soil NO3–-N and NH4+-N is affected by numerous factors. Different fertilization timing sequences of N, P, and K are critical in NO3–-N and NH4+-N distribution, and the contents of soil NO3–-N and NH4+-N directly affect absorption and utilization of plant nutrients29. Due to the characteristics of drip irrigation and fertilization with water, nutrients are also concentrated in the moist body formed by dripping water. According to research N fertilizer exhibits high solubility and good mobility in soil30. This study confirmed that when N fertilizer was applied in the early stage of drip irrigation process, soil NO3–-N and NH4+-N contents significantly increased in 40–60 cm soil layer. Among them, S1 and S3 treatments demonstrated a trend of increasing soil NO3–-N and NH4+-N content with increasing soil depth, increasing the risk of NO3–-N and NH4+-N leaching31. When N fertilizer is applied in the middle and early stages of drip irrigation, the contents of soil NO3–-N and NH4+-N contents significantly increase in 0–20 cm soil layer, and S2 and S6 concentrations in the upper soil are the most obvious, which is not conducive to better absorption of nutrients by cotton roots. When N fertilizer is applied in the middle and late stages of drip irrigation, soil NO3–-N and NH4+-N contents significantly increase in 20–40 cm. Among them, soil NO3–-N and NH4+-N contents in S5 are significantly higher than in other treatments, indicating that appropriate backward fertilization timing sequences of N fertilizer can adjust the distribution of soil NO3–-N and NH4+-N and make it aggregate in the middle soil layer, which helps cotton roots better absorb and utilize N and improve N utilization efficiency. The indoor simulation results of Li et al32,33, indicated that medium-term fertilization treatment (1/4 Time W–1/2 Time N–1/4 Time W) improved N distribution uniformity in soil. Gardenas et al34, selected four micro-irrigation and fertilization systems in 4 different soil types to form 16 cases, and simulated the effect of system operation mode on NO3–-N leaching. The simulation results reveal that fertilization in the later stage of irrigation process can reduce the leaching loss of NO3–-N yielding, similar conclusions during this test.

P is mainly adsorbed by the soil, with poor mobility. When P comes in contact with the soil, adsorption, fixation, and chemical reaction fixation occur35, resulting in P is fixation as ineffective state P fertilizer for plant uptake and utilization36. As a result, P is subjected to stronger adsorption by the soil, affecting the amount and the rate of migration37. According to changes in AP content in different soil depths under various NPK timing sequences, it can be seen that during drip irrigation process, in the process of drip irrigation, with the postponement of the fertilization timing sequence of P fertilizer, the soil AP accumulates more at 0–5 cm, among which soil AP content under S4 was most concentrated in 0–5 cm soil layer, which was significantly higher than other treatments. Soil AP content was the lowest in 5–15 cm and 15–25 cm soil layers. This indicates that directly application P into the soil during drip irrigation does not promote downward migration of soil AP content. In contrast, in the drip irrigation process, the soil AP content was more concentrated in 5–15 cm and 15–25 cm soil layers when water was applied for a period of time before applying P, at the same time, the plant can absorb P better, and the PO43–-P content of petiole is also higher. In particular, soil AP content of S5 was significantly higher than other treatments. This implies that according to the law of P fertilizer transport in soil, irrigating water for a period of time before applying P during in the drip irrigation process improved P mobility in the soil38. This may be because the drip irrigation process with water first activates the organic matter and microorganisms in the soil, reducing P fixation by the soil and activating insoluble P compounds39, due to changing the timing sequences of drip irrigation fertilization, placing P fertilizer earlier in the soil is beneficial for the movement of P fertilizer towards a deeper layer based on the characteristics of the fertilizer following the water during the drip irrigation process.

Conclusion

In summary, this work confirms that the drip irrigation cotton NPK fertilization timing sequences management method of S5 (1/4Time W-1/4Time PK-1/4Time N-1/4Time W), which prevents N leaching from the cotton soil, increases P displacement distance, benefits plant nutrient absorption, significantly improves fertilizer utilization efficiency, and reduces environmental pollution.

Author contributions

Z.D. contributed to the conceptualization, Methodology, software, data curation, writing—original draft preparation, writing- reviewing and editing. Y.L. and F.M. contributed to the writing—reviewing and editing, supervision, project administration, funding acquisition. M.L., B.C., X.L., X.F., S.W. contributed to the investigation, data curation, resources.

Funding

This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31860346), the Key Technologies and System Construction of Big Data in Main Links of Cotton Production of XPCC (2018Aa00400), the Financial Science And Technology Plan Project of XPCC (2020Ab017, 2020Ab018), the Financial Science And Technology Plan Project of Shihezi City (2020ZD01) and Autonomous Region Postgraduate Research and Innovation Project (XJ2019G082).

Data availability

The datasets used or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reason able request.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Contributor Information

Yang Liu, Email: ly.0318@163.com.

Fuyu Ma, Email: mfy_agr@shzu.edu.cn.

References

  • 1.Rao F, Abudikeranmu A, Shi XP, Heerink N, Ma XL. Impact of participatory irrigation management on mulched drip irrigation technology adoption in rural Xinjiang, China. Water Resour. Econ. 2021;33:100170. doi: 10.1016/j.wre.2020.100170. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Xu G, Levkovitch I, Soriano S. Integrated effect of irrigation frequency and phosphorus level on lettuce: P uptake, root growth and yield. Plant Soil. 2004;263:297–309. doi: 10.1023/B:PLSO.0000047743.19391.42. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Wang Z, Fan B, Guo LL. Soil salinization after long-term mulched drip irrigation poses a potential risk to agricultural sustainability. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2019;70(1):20–24. doi: 10.1111/ejss.12742. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Sharmasarkar FC, Sharmasarkar S, Held LJ, Miller SD, Vance GF, Zhang RD. Agroeconomic analyses of drip irrigation for sugarbeet production. Agron. J. 2001;93(3):517–523. doi: 10.2134/agronj2001.933517x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Zhong RS, Tian FQ, Yang PN, Yi QX. Plant and irrigation methods for cotton in southern Xinjiang, China. Irrig. Drain. 2016;65(4):461–468. doi: 10.1002/ird.2015. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Wang WH. Modeling of effectiveness assessment on N2O emission reduction in farmland under drip irrigation and fertilization. Ekoloji. 2019;28(107):2161–2171. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Duggan BL, Yeates SJ, Gaff N, Constable GA. Phosphorus fertilizer requirements and nutrient uptake of irrigated dry-season cotton grown on virgin soil in tropical Australia. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2009;40(15–16):2616–2637. doi: 10.1080/00103620902896761. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Glass ADM. Nitrogen use efficiency of crop plants: Physiological constraints upon nitrogen absorption. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2003;22(5):453–470. doi: 10.1080/07352680390243512. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kodur S, Shrestha UB, Maraseni TN, Deo RC. Environmental and economic impacts and trade-offs from simultaneous management of soil constraints, nitrogen and water. J. Clean. Prod. 2019;222:960–970. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.03.079. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Ma H, Pu S, Li P, Niu X, Wu X, Yang Z, Zhu J, Yang T, Hou Z, Ma X. Towards to understanding the preliminary loss and absorption of nitrogen and phosphorus under different treatments in cotton drip- irrigation in northwest Xinjiang. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(7):e0249730. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249730. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Shareef M, Gui DW, Zeng FJ, Waqas M, Ahmed Z, Zhang B, Iqbal H, Xue J. Nitrogen leaching, recovery efficiency, and cotton productivity assessments on desert-sandy soil under various application methods. Agric. Water Manag. 2019;223:105716. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2019.105716. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Nachimuthu G, Watkins MD, Hulugalle NR, Weaver TB, Finlay LA, McCorkell BE. Leaching of dissolved organic carbon and nitrogen under cotton farming systems in a Vertisol. Soil Use Manag. 2019;35(3):443–452. doi: 10.1111/sum.12510. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Paulo EN, Galindo FS, Rabelo FHS, Frazao JJ, Lavres J. Nitrification inhibitor 3,4-Dimethylpyrazole phosphate improves nitrogen recovery and accumulation in cotton plants by reducing NO3− leaching under N-15-urea fertilization. Plant Soil. 2021;469:259–272. doi: 10.1007/s11104-021-05169-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Chen XM, Fang K, Chen C. Seasonal variation and impact factors of available phosphorus in typical paddy soils of Taihu Lake region, China. Water Environ. J. 2012;26(3):392–398. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-6593.2011.00299.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Cardoso, E. F., Wolter, R. C., Vecozzi, T. A., Teixeira, J. B. D., Carlos, F. S. & Sousa, R. O. Phosphate fertilization for rice irrigated in soils with different phosphorus adsorption capacities. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. (2020).
  • 16.Cote CM, Bristow KL, Charlesworth PB, Cook FJ. Analysis of soil wetting and solute transport in subsurface trickle irrigation. Irrig. Sci. 2003;22:143–156. doi: 10.1007/s00271-003-0080-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Ortega-Reig M, Sanchis-Ibor C, Palau-Salvador G, Garcia-Molla M, Avella-Reus L. Institutional and management implications of drip irrigation introduction in collective irrigation systems in Spain. Agric. Water Manag. 2017;187:164–172. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2017.03.009. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Ju HR, Zhang ZX, Wen QK, Wang J, Zhong LJ, Zuo LJ. Spatial patterns of irrigation water withdrawals in China and implications for water saving. Chin. Geogr. Sci. 2017;27(3):362–373. doi: 10.1007/s11769-017-0871-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Kononchuk VV. Phosphate composition and transformation of fertilizer phosphorus in the light-chestnut soil of the Transvolga Saratov region under irrigation as depending on the fertilizer rates, methods of application, and time of interaction with the soil. Eurasian Soil Sci. 2000;33:S72–S78. [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Phene CJ, Davis KR, Hutmatcher RB. Effect of high frequency surface and subsurface drip irrigation on root distribution of sweet corn. Irrig. Sci. 1991;12:135–140. doi: 10.1007/BF00192284. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Thompson TL, Doerge TA, Godin RE. Subsurface drip irrigation and fertigation of broccoli: Yield, quality, and nitrogen uptake. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2002;66:186–192. [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Huang LM, Yang PL, Ren SM, Cui HB. Effects of continuous and pulse irrigation with different nitrogen applications on soil moisture, nitrogen transport and accumulation in root systems. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng. 2018;11(5):139–149. [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Iqbal M, Khan AG, Amjad M. Soil physical health Indices, soil organic carbon, nitrate contents and wheat growth as influenced by irrigation and nitrogen rates. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2012;14(1):1–10. [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Gaur ML, Aswini K. Performance evaluation of drip fertigation system in lemon plants. Indian J. Soil Conserv. 2003;31(1):45–51. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Garb Y, Friedlander L. From transfer to translation: Using systemic understandings of technology to understand drip irrigation uptake. Agric. Syst. 2014;128:13–24. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2014.04.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Cheng JB, Chen YC, He TB, Liu RL, Yi M, Yang ZM. Nitrogen leaching losses following biogas slurry irrigation to purple soil of the Three Gorges Reservoir Area. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018;25(29):29096–29103. doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-2875-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Luo Z, Liu H, Li W, Zhao Q, Dai J, Tian J, Dong H. Effects of reduced nitrogen rate on cotton yield and nitrogen use efficiency as mediated by application mode or plant density. Field Crop Res. 2018;218:150–157. doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2018.01.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Pei, L. L., Fu, G. Z. & Yun, G. J. Coupling effect of water and nitrogen on cotton nitrogen use efficiency under different patterns of mulched drip irrigation. J. Irrig. Drainage (2009).
  • 29.Arp HPH, Xie ZB. How do different nitrogen application levels and irrigation practices impact biological nitrogen fixation and its distribution in paddy system? Plant Soil. 2021;467(1–2):329–344. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Berlin M, Nambi IM, Kumar GS. Experimental and numerical investigations on nitrogen species transport in unsaturated soil during various irrigation patterns. Sadhana Acad. Proc. Eng. Sci. 2015;40(8):2429–2455. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Tian D, Zhang YY, Mu YJ, Zhou YZ, Zhang CL, Liu JF. The effect of drip irrigation and drip fertigation on N2O and NO emissions, water saving and grain yields in a maize field in the North China Plain. Sci. Total Environ. 2017;575:1034–1040. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Li J, Zhang J, Rao M. Modeling of water flow and nitrate transport under surface drip fertigation. Trans. ASAE. 2005;48:627–637. doi: 10.13031/2013.18336. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Li J, Zhang J, Rao M. Wetting patterns and nitrogen distributions as affected by fertigation strategies from a surface point source. Agric. Water Manag. 2004;67(2):89–104. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2004.02.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Gardenas AI, Hopmans JW, Hanson BR, Simunek J. Two dimensional modeling of nitrate leaching for various fertigation scenarios under microirrigation. Agric. Water Manag. 2005;74:219–242. doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2004.11.011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Dorahy CG, Rochester IJ, Blair GJ. Response of field-grown cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) to phosphorus fertilisation on alkaline soils in eastern Australia. Aust. J. Soil Res. 2004;42(8):913–920. doi: 10.1071/SR04037. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Assis CP, Oliveira TS, Dantas JDD, Mendonca ED. Organic matter and phosphorus fractions in irrigated agroecosystems in a semi-arid region of Northeastern Brazil. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2010;138(1–2):74–82. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2010.04.002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Rabeharisoa L, Razanakoto OR, Razafimanantsoa MP, Rakotoson T, Amery F, Smolders E. Larger bioavailability of soil phosphorus for irrigated rice compared with rainfed rice in Madagascar: Results from a soil and plant survey. Soil Use Manag. 2012;28(4):448–456. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-2743.2012.00444.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Xu JH, Chen YN, Li DH, Tian SS. How to sustainably use water resources-A case study for decision support on the water utilization of Xinjiang, China. Water. 2020;12(12):3564. doi: 10.3390/w12123564. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Raine SR, Meyer WS, Rassam DW, Hutson JL, Cook FJ. Soil-water and solute movement under precision irrigation: Knowledge gaps for managing sustainable root zones. Irrig. Sci. 2007;26(1):91–100. doi: 10.1007/s00271-007-0075-y. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reason able request.

Articles from Scientific Reports are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES