Skip to main content
Annals of Botany logoLink to Annals of Botany
. 2005 Jul 15;96(4):639–646. doi: 10.1093/aob/mci216

The Potential for Nitrification and Nitrate Uptake in the Rhizosphere of Wetland Plants: A Modelling Study

G J D KIRK 1,*, H J KRONZUCKER 2
PMCID: PMC4247031  PMID: 16024557

Abstract

Background and Aims It has recently found that lowland rice grown hydroponically is exceptionally efficient in absorbing Inline graphic, raising the possibility that rice and other wetland plants growing in flooded soil may absorb significant amounts of Inline graphic formed by nitrification of Inline graphic in the rhizosphere. This is important because (a) this Inline graphic is otherwise lost through denitrification in the soil bulk; and (b) plant growth and yield are generally improved when plants absorb their nitrogen as a mixture of Inline graphic and Inline graphic compared with growth on either N source on its own. A mathematical model is developed here with which to assess the extent of Inline graphic absorption from the rhizosphere by wetland plants growing in flooded soil, considering the important plant and soil processes operating.

Methods The model considers rates of O2 transport away from an individual root and simultaneous O2 consumption in microbial and non-microbial processes; transport of Inline graphic towards the root and its consumption in nitrification and uptake at the root surface; and transport of Inline graphic formed from Inline graphic towards the root and its consumption in denitrification and uptake by the root. The sensitivity of the model's predictions to its input parameters is tested over the range of conditions in which wetland plants grow.

Key Results The model calculations show that substantial quantities of Inline graphic can be produced in the rhizosphere of wetland plants through nitrification and taken up by the roots under field conditions. The rates of Inline graphic uptake can be comparable with those of Inline graphic. The model also shows that rates of denitrification and subsequent loss of N from the soil remain small even where Inline graphic production and uptake are considerable.

Conclusions Nitrate uptake by wetland plants may be far more important than thought hitherto. This has implications for managing wetland soils and water, as discussed in this paper.

Keywords: Ammonium, flooded soil, modelling, nitrate, nitrification–denitrification, rice, rhizosphere, root aeration, soil aeration, wetland plants

INTRODUCTION

In flooded soils, Inline graphic added to the soil or formed by nitrification of Inline graphic in aerobic zones near roots or at the soil surface tends to be rapidly lost through denitrification in the anoxic soil bulk, and it is therefore generally assumed that wetland plants take up little Inline graphic compared with Inline graphic. However, in experiments using the radiotracer 13N and hydroponically grown seedlings of rice, it was found that a widely grown variety of lowland rice was exceptionally efficient in absorbing and assimilating Inline graphic compared with Inline graphic, and compared with other plant species (Kronzucker et al., 1999, 2000). This suggests a particular adaptation of rice to Inline graphic and raises the possibility that Inline graphic absorption by rice and perhaps other wetland plants is more important than generally thought. Since growth and yield of most plant species are superior under mixed Inline graphic nutrition (Taiz and Zeiger, 2002), this possibility is intriguing and warrants further investigation.

Three lines of evidence from Kronzucker et al. suggest unusually efficient Inline graphic absorption. First, in the Michaelis–Menten relationships fitted to N influx data over an ecologically and agronomically relevant range of N supply, and plants of identical N status, Vmax for steady-state N influx was 40 % greater for Inline graphic than for Inline graphic, and KM was 50 % smaller. Secondly, Inline graphic absorption was inducible and, in plants deprived of Inline graphic for 24 h, the induction of Inline graphic uptake was exceptionally rapid, peaking within 2 h; in comparison, in barley, which is considered a highly efficient Inline graphic user, full induction requires up to 24 h, and in white spruce, which is considered poor at using Inline graphic, full induction takes several days (references in Kronzucker et al., 1995, 1997, 2000). Thirdly, from the subcellular distribution of N absorbed by plants fed either Inline graphic or Inline graphic, estimated from the kinetics of 13N efflux from labelled roots, the proportion of Inline graphic translocated to the shoot was 50 % larger, and that lost through efflux back out of the roots 50 % smaller. When Inline graphic and Inline graphic were provided together at the same total N concentration as in the single N species experiments, absorption and assimilation of Inline graphic were repressed, but those of Inline graphic were stimulated to the extent that net N influx was doubled compared with plants fed solely on Inline graphic. Because very little free Inline graphic is translocated to the shoot in rice (Kronzucker et al., 1998), this indicates that Inline graphic enhances Inline graphic assimilation in some way, possibly through the Inline graphic-specific induction of additional pathways for Inline graphic assimilation (Kronzucker et al., 1999; Britto and Kronzucker, 2004).

The extent of Inline graphic uptake by roots in flooded soil will depend on its rate of formation from Inline graphic near root surfaces, its rate of transport to and absorption by the root, and its rate of transport away from the root and loss through denitrification. The rates of Inline graphic formation and subsequent denitrification will depend on reducing conditions in the soil and sinks for O2 other than nitrification. The sinks include microbial and non-microbial processes.

In this paper, a mathematical model of these processes is developed with which to calculate rates of formation, uptake and loss of Inline graphic over the range of conditions in which wetland plants grow.

THEORY

Consider the movements of O2, Inline graphic and Inline graphic in anoxic flooded soil near a cylindrical root that simultaneously releases O2 and absorbs Inline graphic and Inline graphic. The microbial sinks for O2 include both autotrophic processes, such as oxidation of Inline graphic, S2− and CH4, and heterotrophic processes (Conrad and Frenzel, 2002; Kirk, 2004). The non-microbial sinks include oxidation of inorganic reductants in the soil, such as Fe(II), which may be both mobile and immobile (Howeler and Bouldin, 1971; Reddy et al., 1980; Kirk and Solivas, 1994).

In initially anoxic soil, populations of aerobic microbes will be small, and therefore non-microbial processes consuming O2 will initially tend to dominate. As inorganic reductants close to the roots become exhausted, the rate of non-microbial O2 consumption will decline. Concomitantly, the rate of microbial O2 consumption will increase as aerobic populations develop. Hence the system will be complex and dynamic. We have some understanding of the kinetics of the non-microbial processes (Ahmad and Nye, 1990; Kirk et al., 1990; Kirk and Solivas, 1994), but only a weak understanding of the microbial processes and the complex interactions they involve (Bodelier et al., 2000, 2004; Brune et al., 2000; van Bodegum et al., 2001). Therefore, a very elaborate treatment of the O2-consuming processes, dissecting out the various contributors, is unjustified at this stage of our understanding, and, in our model, we therefore combine microbial and non-microbial processes. Likewise, our understanding of growth rates and activities of Inline graphic-oxidizing microbes in the rhizosphere of wetland plants and interactions with nutrients, toxins and competing substrates is insufficient for a very elaborate treatment, and hence we apply the simplest realistic treatment, with the maximum rate of nitrification as a proportion of the maximum rate of overall O2 consumption.

The following sections give the equations we use to describe the system. The symbols used are defined in Table 1.

Table 1.

List of symbols

Symbol
Meaning
Dimensions*
a Root radius Length
b Radius of zone of root influence Length
bNH4 Buffer power for Inline graphic, Inline graphic VolumeL volume−1
DL Solute diffusion coefficient in water, subscripted A, N or O for Inline graphic, Inline graphic and O2 Area time−1
FmNH4 Maximum influx of Inline graphic into roots Mass area−1 time−1
FmNO3 Maximum influx of Inline graphic into roots Mass area−1 time−1
f Soil diffusion impedance factor
IDenit Inhibition function for denitrification
KMDenit Michaelis constant for denitrification Inline graphic
KMNH4 Michaelis constant for Inline graphic uptake Inline graphic
KMNit1 Michaelis constant for nitrification (re O2) Inline graphic
KMNit2 Michaelis constant for nitrification (re Inline graphic) Inline graphic
KMNO3 Michaelis constant for Inline graphic uptake Inline graphic
KMO Michaelis constant for O2 consumption Inline graphic
LV Root length density Length volume−1
Inline graphic Concentration of Inline graphic in soil solution Inline graphic
Inline graphic Concentration of Inline graphic in soil solution Inline graphic
[O2]L Moncentration of O2 in soil solution Inline graphic
VmDenit Maximum rate of denitrification Mass volume−1 time−1
VmNit Maximum rate of nitrification Mass volume−1 time−1
VmO Maximum rate of O2 consumption Mass volume−1 time−1
v Water flux into root Length time−1
λ Root wall permeability factor Length time−1
θ Soil water fraction by volume VolumeL volume−1
*

Subscript L indicates soil solution; no subscript indicates whole soil.

Oxygen

The transport of O2 away from the root and its simultaneous consumption in soil processes is described by the equation

graphic file with name M77.gif

where RO is the rate of consumption in soil processes. The whole-soil concentration of O2 is related to the concentration in solution by [O2] = θ[O2]L. Following the reasoning above, we lump together microbial and non-microbial sinks for O2 and describe net O2 consumption using Michaelis–Menten kinetics:

graphic file with name M78.gif

The boundary conditions for eqn (1) are as follows. The flux of O2 across the root surface, r = a, depends on the rate of delivery of O2 through the root, the external sink for O2 in the soil and the permeability of the root wall separating the soil solution from the root gas spaces. Following Armstrong and Beckett (1987), we define a root wall permeability factor, λ, relating the flux across the root wall to the difference in O2 concentration across it. The flux across the root wall is equal to the flux into the soil at r = a. Hence

graphic file with name M79.gif

where subscripts c and a indicate the root cortical tissue and the soil at the root surface, respectively. Armstrong and Beckett give values of λ derived from experiments with polarographic electrodes (see Parameter Values, below). At the other boundary where the zones of influence of adjacent roots overlap, there is no transfer of O2. Thus

graphic file with name M80.gif

Ammonium

The transport of Inline graphic towards the root and its simultaneous consumption in nitrification is described by the equation

graphic file with name M82.gif

The whole-soil concentration of Inline graphic is related to the concentration in solution by the soil Inline graphic buffer power: Inline graphic. The rate of nitrification will depend on the concentrations of O2 and Inline graphic, and we describe this using dual-substrate Michaelis–Menten kinetics (see McConnaughey and Bouldin, 1985, for Inline graphic reduction, or Arah and Stephen, 1998, for CH4 oxidation):

graphic file with name M88.gif

where VmNit is the rate in the absence of substrate limitation and KMNit1 and KMNit2 are Michaelis constants. The boundary conditions for eqn (5) are as follows. The flux of Inline graphic into the root will depend on the concentration of Inline graphic in solution at the root surface and the root Inline graphic absorption properties. In accordance with conventional practice (Kronzucker et al., 1997, 2000), we describe this with a Michaelis–Menten equation:

graphic file with name M92.gif

The quantities FmNH4 and KMNH4 are not constant during plant growth but vary with the plant's N status and other factors. However, we treat them as constants and test the model's sensitivity to them. At the other boundary, we assume there is no transfer of Inline graphic. Thus

graphic file with name M94.gif

Nitrate

The transport of Inline graphic towards the root and its simultaneous production in nitrification and consumption in denitrification is described by the equation

graphic file with name M96.gif

Because Inline graphic is not adsorbed on the soil solid, its concentration in the whole soil is simply related to the concentration in solution by Inline graphic. The rate of denitrification will depend on Inline graphic and also on the concentration of O2, which is the preferred electron acceptor. Following McConnaughey and Bouldin (1985), we describe this with a modified Michaelis–Menten equation:

graphic file with name M100.gif

where IDenit is a function for inhibition by O2. We take inhibition to be linear up to a threshold concentration equal to the Michaelis constant for O2 consumption (Arah and Vinten, 1995):

graphic file with name M101.gif
graphic file with name M102.gif

As for Inline graphic, we use a Michaelis–Menten equation for the relationship between the flux of Inline graphic into the root and the concentration in solution at the root surface:

graphic file with name M105.gif

At the other boundary, we assume there is no transfer of Inline graphic. Thus

graphic file with name M107.gif

Numerical solutions

We expressed eqns (1)(14) in finite-difference form using Crank–Nicholson approximations and solved the resulting sets of equations by standard numerical methods (Smith, 1985). With time steps of 0·1 h and distance steps of 0·1 mm, mass balances for all solute were conserved to within 1 % for simulations up to 10 d. Copies of the computer program for the numerical solutions, written in Fortran, are available from the first author.

PARAMETER VALUES

The standard set of parameter values used in the calculations are given in Table 2. Our reasons for choosing these values are as follows.

Table 2.

Standard parameter values

Parameter
Value
Reference
a 0·1 mm Matsuo and Hoshikawa (1993)
b 2 mm Matsuo and Hoshikawa (1993)
bNH4 50 cm3 cm−3 Kirk (2004)
DLA,N,O 2 × 10−5 cm2 s−1 Kirk (2004)
FmNH4 5 pmol cm−2 s−1 Kronzucker et al. (1999)
FmNO3 25 pmol cm−2 s−1 Kronzucker et al. (1999)
f 0·4 Kirk et al. (2003)
KMDenit 1 µm See text
KMNH4 50 µm Kronzucker et al. (1999)
KMNit1 1 µm See text
KMNit2 200 µm See text
KMNO3 10 µm Kronzucker et al. (1999)
KMO 1 µm See text
Inline graphic 5 µmol cm−3 Kirk (2004)
[O2]Lc 0·18 µm See text
VmDenit 2 pmol cm−3 s−1 See text
VmNit/VmO 0·25 See text
VmO 500 pmol cm−3 s−1 See text
v 0 cm s−1 See text
λ 1 × 10−4 cm s−1 Armstrong and Beckett (1987)
θ 0·6 cm3 cm−3 Kirk (2004)

Rate of O2 release

The O2 budget of an individual root depends both on the rate of O2 movement and consumption within the root—which varies with position along the root and between main roots and laterals—and on the rate of O2 consumption in the surrounding soil. Measurements of rates of release, therefore, need to allow for differences across the root and its laterals and must be made under O2 sink conditions that are realistic for roots in soil. In practice, it is difficult to satisfy these conditions, and consequently reported rates of release for whole root systems vary by more than two orders of magnitude (Bedford et al., 1991; Begg et al., 1994; Sorrel and Armstrong, 1994).

However, mathematical models of root aeration show that rates of release at the upper end of the measured range can be sustained by rice roots with typical characteristics (Armstrong and Beckett, 1987; Kirk, 2003). Kirk (2003) developed a model of the steady-state diffusion of O2 through a primary rice root and its laterals and the simultaneous consumption of O2 in root respiration and loss to the soil. A sensitivity analysis showed that the basic architecture of rice root systems, i.e. a system of coarse, aerenchymatous, primary roots with gas-impermeable walls conducting O2 to short, fine, gas-permeable laterals, provides the greatest absorbing surface per unit aerated root mass. With this architecture and typical rates of root respiration, rates of O2 loss to the soil from the laterals and primary root tip can be at the upper end measured experimentally, equivalent to a flux of up to 25 pmol cm−2 (root surface) s−1.

Based on this and trial runs with the present model, we use as standard a root wall permeability factor, λ = 10−4 cm s−1 and we specify the O2 concentration in the root cortex {[O2]Lc in eqn (3)} as equal to half that in air [8·75 mol cm−3 (gas space) at s.t.p.].

Rate of O2 consumption

For ten soils with a wide range of organic matter and reducible Fe contents, Howeler and Bouldin (1971, Table 4) found steady-state rates of O2 consumption by reduced soil cores exposed to O2 equivalent to 100–1000 pmol cm−3 s−1 (mean value 500 pmol cm−3 s−1). Roughly 50 % of this was microbial. We therefore take VmO = 500 pmol cm−3 s−1 as our standard value. Heterotrophic aerobes will operate efficiently at sub micromolar O2 concentrations (Conrad and Frenzel, 2002) and we take as standard KMO = 1 µm.

Rate of nitrification

The maximum rate of nitrification is taken as a proportion of the maximum overall rate of microbial O2 consumption. From the stoichiometry of nitrification, 2 mol of O2 are consumed per mol of Inline graphic formed:

graphic file with name M110.gif

Therefore, an upper limit on the rate of nitrification is half the net rate of microbial O2 consumption, i.e. VmNit/VmO = 0·5. We take as standard VmNit/VmO = 0·25. Also we take as standard KMNit1 = KMO = 1 µm and KMNit2 = 200 µm based on typical concentrations of Inline graphic in solution in rice soils.

Rate of denitrification

Experiments in which Inline graphic fertilizer is added to flooded soils under field conditions indicate maximum rates of N2 + N2O loss through denitrification of a few kg of N ha−1 d−1 (e.g. Lindau et al., 1990; Samson et al., 1990). Assuming denitrification to be distributed over a soil depth of 10 cm, this is equivalent to a rate of denitrification per unit soil volume of a few pmol cm−3 s−1. We therefore take as standard VmDenit = 2 pmol cm−3 s−1. Measured concentrations of Inline graphic in flooded soils rarely exceed a few micromolar, unless the soil is fertilized with Inline graphic (Arth and Frenzel, 2000; Liesack et al., 2000), and therefore denitrifier populations must operate at concentrations less than this. We assign as standard KMDenit = 1 µm.

The ratio of nitrous oxide to nitrogen gas formed in denitrification will depend on the relative abundance of Inline graphic and organic substrates and on other factors influencing the rates of the sequential steps in denitrification (Kirk, 2004). Small concentrations of Inline graphic relative to organic substrates, as expected near the roots of wetland plants, will favour complete reduction to N2. Also, the slow escape of any N2O formed in flooded soil will favour its further reduction to N2. Hence, reported denitrification losses from rice fields as N2O are at least two orders of magnitude smaller than losses as N2 (Galbally and Chalk, 1987; Mosier et al., 1989; Buresh et al., 1991; Bronson et al., 1997).

Root Inline graphic and Inline graphic uptake properties

Up to a certain point, plants can regulate the inflow of N across their roots according to their need for N, and the inflow for a given external N concentration therefore depends on the plant's past supply of N. Hence, Wang et al. (1993) found for rice grown for 4 weeks in 2, 100 and 1000 µm Inline graphic solutions, the respective values of Vmax (µmol g−1 h−1) and KM (µM) were: 12·8 and 32·2; 8·2 and 90·2; and 3·4 and 122·1, i.e. Vmax was 6-fold smaller and KM 4-fold larger for 2 µM compared with 1000 µm Inline graphic. For rice grown in 100 µm N solutions, Kronzucker et al. (1999) found that Vmax values were 8·1 and 5·7 µmol g−1 h−1 for Inline graphic- and Inline graphic-fed plants, respectively, and KM values were 26 and 51 µm. Given that external Inline graphic concentrations at the root surface will be far smaller than Inline graphic concentrations, Inline graphic uptake will be ‘upregulated’ to a greater extent than Inline graphic uptake, and we take as standard Fmax = 5 pmol cm−2 s−1 (calculated from Vmax in µmol g−1 h−1 using root density = 1 g cm−3 and a = 0·1 mm) and KM = 50 µm for Inline graphic uptake, and Fmax = 25 pmol cm−2 s−1 and KM = 10 µm for Inline graphic uptake.

Root geometry

The root system of rice plants in flooded soils comprises coarse primary roots, 0·3–1 mm in diameter, supporting a dense system of fine laterals, 50–150 µm in diameter (Matsuo and Hoshikawa, 1993). Total root length densities averaged over the 15–20 cm deep puddled soil layer may be as high as 20–30 cm cm−3. Calculations with the above parameters for root Inline graphic absorption properties and measured concentrations of Inline graphic in soil solutions indicate that almost the whole of this root length is required to account for measured rates of N uptake by rice in flooded soils (Kirk and Solivas, 1997).

The corresponding mean inter-root distance is calculated as follows. With a regular parallel array of roots, if each root is assigned a cylinder of influence such that the whole soil volume is divided equally between roots, the radius, b, of the cylinder is given by

graphic file with name M131.gif

where LV is the root length density. The value b = 3 mm, which is realistic for half the distance between neighbouring primary roots, corresponds to LV = 3·5 cm cm−3; b = 1 mm, which is realistic for half the distance between laterals, corresponds to LV = 31·8 cm cm−3.

MODEL PREDICTIONS

Predicted concentration profiles, fluxes and rates of nitrification–denitrification

Figure 1 shows the concentration profiles of O2, Inline graphic and Inline graphic in the soil calculated with the standard set of parameter values over 10 d of root–soil contact, and Fig. 2 gives the fluxes of O2 and N species across the root over time. Figure 1 shows that only very small concentrations of Inline graphic in the soil solution develop: approx. 1–2 µm within <0·5 mm of the root and 0 µm at >1 mm from the root, i.e. given the radial geometry, all but undetectable averaged over the inter-root distance. Nonetheless, the fluxes of Inline graphic into the root shown in Fig. 2 are substantial. The accumulated uptake of nitrogen over 10 d is 1·61 µmol cm−3 of soil, or 33 % of the initial Inline graphic content of the soil (= 5 µmol cm−3, equivalent to 105 kg of N ha−1 over a 15 cm depth), and the concentration of Inline graphic in solution in the soil bulk concomitantly falls from 100 to 64 µm. Nitrate uptake accounted for 34 % of total N uptake, and nitrification accounted for 14 % of the total O2 consumption in 10 d. The ratio of N denitrified to total N uptake was 0·20 or 6·6 % of the Inline graphic initially in the soil.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Calculated concentration–distance profiles of O2, Inline graphic and Inline graphic in the soil near a root after 10 d of root–soil contact. Parameter values as in Table 2.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

Fluxes of O2, Inline graphic, Inline graphic and total N across the root over time. Parameter values as in Table 2.

To gauge how realistic these results are, we compare the calculated rates of denitrification with published values. Measurements of denitrification in flooded rice fields made by following the emission of 15N2 and 15N2O following addition of N-fertilizer strongly labelled with 15N indicate losses in the range 1–5 % of applied ammoniacal-N over the range of soils and management conditions considered (Buresh and Austin, 1988; Mosier et al., 1989; Reddy et al., 1989; Buresh et al., 1991). Arth et al. (1998) directly measured N2 and N2O emitted by rice plants grown in chambers with an atmosphere of O2 and helium. This gave denitrification losses of the order of 6 % of added urea-N in 10 d and mean N2 + N2O emission rates of approx. 30 nmol (N) cm−2 (soil surface) h−1. The mean emission rate calculated here with the standard parameters is 14 nmol (N) cm−2 (soil surface) h−1 assuming 10 cm soil depth. We conclude that our calculated losses are realistic.

We know of no published direct measurements of rates of Inline graphic uptake by wetland plants in flooded soil under field conditions. Because the Inline graphic is rapidly assimilated, direct measurements of uptake are difficult.

Sensitivity analysis

Figure 3 shows the sensitivity of the calculated total N and Inline graphic uptakes and denitrification to model parameter values over what we consider to be realistic ranges for wetland plants. As discussed above, we have some understanding of total rates of O2 consumption in flooded soils, but a much weaker understanding of the growth rates and activities of nitrifying microbes under different circumstances. We therefore show the sensitivity to different parameters in interaction with a varying nitrification potential as represented by Vmax for nitrification as a proportion of Vmax for total O2 consumption (VmNit/VmO).

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3.

Sensitivity of total N uptake, uptake of Inline graphic as a proportion of total N uptake and denitrification as a proportion of total N uptake to model parameter values. (A) The top three graphs indicate sensitivity to Vmax for total O2 consumption [VmO in eqn (2); numbers on curves are values in nmol cm−3 s−1]; (B) the upper middle three graphs indicate sensitivity to parameters for root Inline graphic uptake [Fm, KM in eqn (13); numbers on curves are values in nmol cm−3 s−1, μm]; (C) the lower middle three graphs indicate sensitivity to root length density [LV in eqn (15); numbers on curves are values in cm cm−3]; and (D) the bottom three graphs indicate sensitivity to the soil Inline graphic buffer power (bNH4; numbers on curves are values in cm3 cm−3). Ten d of root–soil contact. Other parameter values as in Table 2.

Effect of nitrification and denitrification rates

Figure 3A shows the sensitivity to the maximum total rate of O2 consumption (VmO). At a given VmNit/VmO, with increases in VmO the proportion of N uptake as Inline graphic increases and total N uptake increases correspondingly. Also, the ratio of N denitrified to total N uptake decreases. This is because with a greater O2 sink, the spread of the oxygenated zone around the root is smaller and nitrification occurs closer to the root. Therefore, the concentration gradient of Inline graphic towards the root is steeper and a greater proportion of the Inline graphic is taken up. The effect of VmO varies with VmNit/VmO: when VmNit/VmO is large, denitrification losses decrease more rapidly with increases in VmO.

Effect of root Inline graphic uptake properties

As FmNO3 increases and KMNO3 decreases, an increasing proportion of N is taken up as Inline graphic and a decreasing proportion of the Inline graphic formed is denitrified (Fig. 3B). Over the range of FmNO3 and KMNO3 values shown in Fig. 3B, and other parameter values as standard, Inline graphic accounts for 15 to nearly 40 % of N uptake. Denitrification losses increase sharply as root Inline graphic uptake decreases.

Effect of root geometry

Figure 3C shows interactions between root geometry and rates of Inline graphic uptake and denitrification. As root length density (LV) increases, the rates of total N uptake and depletion of soil N increase. Simultaneously, with increasing LV, the inter-root distance decreases and therefore the proportion of the inter-root zone that is oxygenated increases, and so nitrification and Inline graphic uptake increase. Superimposed on this is the effect of root radius. With large inter-root distances, increasing the root radius tends to increase the capture of Inline graphic and decrease denitrification (data not shown). However, with small inter-root distances, denitrification rates are small and the capture of Inline graphic increases as the root radius decreases.

Effect of soil Inline graphic buffer power

Figure 3D shows that uptake increases sharply as bNH4 decreases, but the proportion of uptake as Inline graphic is little influenced. As bNH4 decreases, for a given total concentration of Inline graphic in the soil, the concentration of Inline graphic in solution increases, and hence the uptake of Inline graphic tends to increase. Simultaneously, nitrification tends to increase as Inline graphic in solution increases, and hence the rate of Inline graphic uptake increases. Thus, the sensitivity of N uptake to VmNit/VmO increases as bNH4 decreases. There is a corresponding decrease in denitrification relative to N uptake, because the gradient of Inline graphic near the root is shallower at smaller bNH4, and hence a greater proportion of nitrification occurs close to the root.

Effect of mass flow of the soil solution

Mass flow of solution towards the root in the transpiration stream tends to compress the zones of oxygenation and nitrification and extend the zone of Inline graphic depletion. The above calculations were made with v = 0. The model shows that a rapid flux of water across the root surface (v = 10−5 cm s−1) slightly compresses the profile of Inline graphic but has a negligible effect on the profiles of O2 and Inline graphic and rates of Inline graphic uptake and denitrification (data not shown). Approximate solutions of eqn (5) indicate that the fractional increase in Inline graphic influx resulting from mass flow is about av/(0·5DLAθf) (Kirk and Solivas, 1997), or approx. 2 % for the standard parameter values and v = 10−5 cm s−1. Hence, for practical purposes, the effect of mass flow can be ignored.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Our calculations show that wetland plants growing in flooded soil can take up a large part of their nitrogen as Inline graphic formed from Inline graphic in the rhizosphere, without excessive losses of N through denitrification. The extent of this will vary greatly between soils and management regimes, being sensitive to reducing conditions in the soil and the sinks for O2 other than nitrification. Water regimes will particularly influence this. It is expected that in future rice will have to be produced with far less water across Asia as water resources are increasingly diverted to non-agricultural uses (IRRI, 2003). Therefore, water-saving irrigation methods, such as maintaining a minimal depth of standing water in the field and intermittently draining water from the field, will be increasingly widespread. This will favour increased Inline graphic formation, and it will be important to manage conditions to maximize the capture of Inline graphic by the crop and minimize denitrification.

We have focused on lowland rice, but it is probable that other wetland plants are similarly efficient in capturing Inline graphic formed in the rhizosphere. This would have implications for the selection of plants for waste-water treatment in artificial wetlands.

LITERATURE CITED

  1. Ahmad AR, Nye PH. 1990. Coupled diffusion and oxidation of ferrous iron in soils. I. Kinetics of oxygenation of ferrous iron in soil suspension. Journal of Soil Science 41: 395–409. [Google Scholar]
  2. Arah JRM, Stephen KD. 1998. A model of the processes leading to methane emission from peatland. Atmospheric Environment 32: 3257–3264. [Google Scholar]
  3. Arah JRM, Vinten AJA. 1995. Simplified models of anoxia and denitrification in aggregated and simple-structured soils. European Journal of Soil Science 46: 507–517. [Google Scholar]
  4. Armstrong W, Beckett PM. 1987. Internal aeration and the development of stelar anoxia in submerged roots New Phytologist 105: 221–245. [Google Scholar]
  5. Arth I, Frenzel P. 2000. Nitrification and denitrification in the rhizosphere of rice: the detection of processes by a new multi-channel electrode. Biology and Fertility of Soils 31: 427–435. [Google Scholar]
  6. Arth I, Frenzel P, Conrad R. 1998. Denitrification coupled to nitrification in the rhizosphere of rice. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 30: 509–515. [Google Scholar]
  7. Bedford BL, Bouldin DR, Beliveau BD. 1991. Net oxygen and carbon dioxide balances in solutions bathing roots of wetland plants. Journal of Ecology 79: 943–959 [Google Scholar]
  8. Begg CBM, Kirk GJD, MacKenzie AF, Neue H-U. 1994. Root-induced iron oxidation and pH changes in the lowland rice rhizosphere. New Phytologist 128: 469–477. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. van Bodegom PM, Stams F, Mollema L, Boeke S, Leffelaar P. 2001. Methane oxidation and the competition for oxygen in the rice rhizosphere. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 67: 3586–3597. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Bodelier PLE, Roslev P, Henckel T, Frenzel P. 2000. Stimulation by ammonium-based fertilizers of methane oxidation in soil around rice roots. Nature 403: 421–424. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Britto DT, Kronzucker HJ. 2004. Bioengineering nitrogen acquisition in rice: can novel initiatives in rice genomics and physiology contribute to global food security. BioEssays 26: 683–692. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Bronson KF, Neue H-U, Singh U, Abao EB. 1997. Automated chamber measurements of methane and nitrous oxide flux in a flooded rice soil. I. Residue, nitrogen, and water management. Soil Science Society of America Journal 61: 981–987. [Google Scholar]
  13. Brune A, Frenzel P, Cypionka H. 2000. Life at the oxic–anoxic interface: microbial activities and adaptations. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 24: 691–710. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Buresh RJ, Austin ER. 1988. Direct measurement of dinitrogen and nitrous oxide flux in flooded rice fields. Soil Science Society of America Journal 52: 681–688. [Google Scholar]
  15. Buresh RJ, De Datta SK, Samson MI, Sakorn Phongpan, Patoom Snitwonse, Fagi AM, et al. 1991. Dinitrogen and nitrous oxide flux from urea basally applied to puddled rice soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal 55: 268–273. [Google Scholar]
  16. Conrad R, Frenzel P. 2002. Flooded soils. In: Botten G, ed. Encyclopedia of environmental microbiology. New York: Wiley, 1316–1333. [Google Scholar]
  17. Galbally IE, Chalk PM. 1987. Emission of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from a flooded soil fertilized with urea: relation to other nitrogen loss processes. Journal of Atmospheric Chemistry 5: 343–365. [Google Scholar]
  18. Howeler RH, Bouldin DR. 1971. The diffusion and consumption of oxygen in submerged soils. Soil Science Society of America Proceedings 35: 202–208. [Google Scholar]
  19. IRRI. 2003.Rice almanac, 3rd edn. Manila: International Rice Research Institute. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kirk GJD. 2003. Rice root properties for internal aeration and efficient nutrient acquisition in submerged soil. New Phytologist 159: 185–194. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kirk GJD. 2004.The biogeochemistry of submerged soils. Chichester, UK: Wiley. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kirk GJD, Solivas JL. 1994. Coupled diffusion and oxidation of ferrous iron in soils. III. Further development of the model and experimental testing. European Journal of Soil Science 45: 369–378. [Google Scholar]
  23. Kirk GJD, Solivas JL. 1997. On the extent to which root properties and transport through the soil limit nitrogen uptake by lowland rice. European Journal of Soil Science 48: 613–621. [Google Scholar]
  24. Kirk GJD, Ahmad AR, Nye PH. 1990. Coupled diffusion and oxidation of ferrous iron in soils. II. A model of the diffusion and reaction of O2, Fe2+, H+ and HCO3 in soils and a sensitivity analysis of the model. Journal of Soil Science 41: 411–431. [Google Scholar]
  25. Kirk GJD, Solivas JL, Alberto MA. 2003. The effects of redox conditions on solute diffusion in soil. European Journal of Soil Science 54: 617–624. [Google Scholar]
  26. Kronzucker HJ, Glass ADM, Siddiqi MY. 1995. Nitrate induction in spruce: an approach using compartmental analysis. Planta 196: 683–690. [Google Scholar]
  27. Kronzucker HJ, Siddiqi MY, Glass ADM. 1997. Conifer root discrimination against soil nitrate and the ecology of forest succession. Nature 385: 59–61. [Google Scholar]
  28. Kronzucker HJ, Schjoerring JK, Erner Y, Kirk GJD, Siddiqi MY, Glass ADM. 1998. Dynamic interactions between root /article/back/ref-list/ref/citation/inline-formula Inline graphic influx and long-distance N translocation in rice: insights into feedback processes. Plant and Cell Physiology 39: 1287–1293. [Google Scholar]
  29. Kronzucker HJ, Siddiqi MY, Glass ADM, Kirk GJD. 1999. Nitrate–ammonium synergism in rice: a subcellular flux analysis. Plant Physiology 119: 1041–1045. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Kronzucker HJ, Glass ADM, Siddiqi MY, Kirk GJD. 2000. Comparative kinetic analysis of ammonium and nitrate acquisition by tropical lowland rice: implications for rice cultivation and yield potential. New Phytologist 145: 471–476. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Liesack W, Schnell S, Revsbech NP. 2000. Microbiology of flooded rice paddies. FEMS Microbiology Reviews 24: 625–645. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Lindau CW, Patrick WH Jr, DeLaune RD, Reddy KR. 1990. Rate of accumulation and emission of N2, N2O and CH4 from a flooded rice soil. Plant and Soil 129: 269–276. [Google Scholar]
  33. McConnaughey PK, Bouldin DR. 1985. Transient microsite models of denitrification: I. Model development. Soil Science Society of America Journal 49: 886–891. [Google Scholar]
  34. Matsuo T, Hoshikawa K. 1993.Science of the rice plant. I. Morphology. Tokyo: Food and Agriculture Policy Research Center. [Google Scholar]
  35. Mosier AR, Chapman SL, Freney JR. 1989. Determination of dinitrogen emission and retention in floodwater and porewater for a lowland rice field fertilized with 15N-urea. Fertilizer Research 19: 127–136. [Google Scholar]
  36. Reddy KR, Rao PSC, Patrick, WH Jr. 1980. Factors influencing oxygen consumption rates in flooded soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal 44: 741–745. [Google Scholar]
  37. Reddy KR, Patrick, WH Jr, Lindau CW. 1989. Nitrification–denitrification at the plant root–sediment interface in wetlands. Limnology and Oceanography 34: 1004–1013. [Google Scholar]
  38. Samson MI, Buresh RJ, De Datta SK. 1990. Evolution and soil entrapment of nitrogen gases formed by denitrification in flooded soils. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 36: 299–307. [Google Scholar]
  39. Smith GD. 1985.Numerical solution of partial differential equations: finite difference methods, 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  40. Sorrell BK, Armstrong W. 1994. On the difficulties of measuring oxygen release by root systems of wetland plants. Journal of Ecology 82: 177–183. [Google Scholar]
  41. Taiz L, Zeiger E. 2002.Plant physiology. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates. [Google Scholar]
  42. Wang YM, Siddiqi MY, Ruth TJ, Glass ADM. 1993. Ammonium uptake by rice roots. II. Kinetics of 13/article/back/ref-list/ref/citation/inline-formula Inline graphic influx across the plasmalemma. Plant Physiology 103: 1259–1267. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of Botany are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES