«International 17 Workshop th Nitrogen The was jointly organised by Teagasc and AFBI Printed by Print Depot Suggested citation Authors, 2012. Title ...»
de Haan, J.J., Sukkel, W. and Stilma, E.S.C. 2010. Technology versus Agro-Ecology in Designing Vegetable Production Systems in the Netherlands. Acta Horticulturae 852, 123 - 130.
de Haan J.J. and Garcia Diaz, A. (eds.) 2002. Manual on Prototyping Methodology and Multifunctional Crop Rotation.
VEGINECO Report 2. Applied Plant Research. Lelystad. The Netherlands.
Groot Koerkamp, P.W.G. and Bos, A.P. 2008. Designing complex and sustainable Agricultural production systems: an integrated and reflexive approach for the case of table egg production in the Netherlands. NJAS 55, 113‐138.
van Henten, E.J., Bakker, J.C., Marcelis, L.F.M., van ’t Ooster, A., Dekker, E., Stanghellini, C., Vanthoor, B., Randeraat B.V. and Westra, J. 2006. The Adaptive Greenhouse - an Integrated Systems Approach to Developing Protected Cultivation Systems. ISHS Actae Horticulturae Proc. IIIrd 718, 399-406.
Vereijken, P. 1997. A methodical way of prototyping integrated and ecological arable farming systems (I/EAFS) in interaction with pilot farms. European Journal of Agronomy 7, 235-250.
Nitrogen Workshop 2012
The influence of locally injected nitrogen fertilizer (CULTAN) on seed yield of winter rape and grain yield of spring barley in the Czech Republic Peklová, L., Sedlář, O., Balík, J.,Kozlovský, O., Kubešová, K.
Department of Agro-Environmental Chemistry and Plant Nutrition, Facultyof Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
1. Background & Objectives The CULTAN method (Controlled Uptake Long Term Ammonium Nutrition), enables the required nitrogen in the vegetation period to be applied in one application (Sommer, 2005).
This method is based on the injection of the ammonium form of fertilizer to a soil depth of 6 – 10 cm, where it is retained at the point of application (Boelcke, 2000). The ammonium ion is retained by clays and organic matter in these localised areas and the toxicity of the ammonium-N inhibits nitrification and nitrogen movement away from the plant root system.
Nitrogen uptake by plants is controlled by the phytotoxicity of ammonia (Sommer, 2005). The objectives of this trail was to evaluate the influence of the method CULTAN on seed yield of winter rape and grain yield of spring barley.
2. Materials & Methods A 3-year small-plot trial commenced in 2008 at three different experimental sites in the Czech Republic (central Europe), to determine the effect of the CULTAN method on yield of winter rape (Brassica napus L.) cultivar Artus and on yield of spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivar Jersey. In the conventional (control) treatment the total dose of nitrogen fertilizer was divided into the component applications. In the CULTAN treatment the whole N application was applied at once with a injection machine (Maschinen und Antriebstechnik GmbH Güstrow, Germany). The total amount of nitrogen applied was 200 kg N ha-1for winter oilseed rape and for spring barley it was 80 kg N ha-1. The CULTAN fertilization was applied at stage of growth BBCH 26 (branching) in the experiment with winter rape and at stage of growth BBCH 29-30 (offsetting) in the experiment with spring barley. To evaluate the yields, onefactor ANOVA was used followed with the Scheffe’s test at the P 0.05 level of significance.
The computations were done using the Statistica 9.0 programme (StatSoft, Tulsa, USA).
3. Results & Discussion The three-year experiment with winter rape and spring barley showed no significant effect of the CULTAN method on seed yield of winter rape or grain yield of spring barley compared to the conventional treatment (Figure 1). CULTAN fertilization resulted in a lower density of spring barley cover compared to the conventional fertilization system (Sedlář et al., 2011a).
Plants of winter rape were shorter and plant development was more compact (Sommer, 2005).
A lower height of winter rape plants was observed after fertilizing using the CULTAN method compared to the conventional treatment (Peklová et al., 2011a) and CULTAN treated plants tended to have less disease, which is in agreement with the findings of Felgentreu (2003). CULTAN treatment did not lead to higher dry matter content in aboveground biomass (Peklová et al., 2011b) which is contrary to the findings of Sommer (2005). Higher thousand grain weight observed in CULTAN treated spring barley plants (Sedlář et al., 2009) can be explained by the lower intensity of tillering (Petr et al., 1988; Sommer, 2005; Longnecker et al., 1993) and by a longer period of assimilate storage to ears compared to conventional nitrogen fertilization (Sommer, 2005). Higher weights of thousand seeds in winter rape plants were observed when the CULTAN method was used, particularly at the more fertile experimental site, i.e. at Hnevceves site. Locally injected nitrogen fertilizer resulted in higher resistance of spring barley to lodging (Sedlář et al., 2011b). The grain yield of the CULTAN treated spring barley plants were statistically higher at the less fertile site at higher altitude and wetter climate (Humpolec), compared to the more fertile site (Ivanovice). Winter rape Nitrogen Workshop 2012 was a very N demanding crop and according to our findings CULTAN fertilization was more suitable at the fertile site (Hnevceves).
4. Conclusion The method CULTAN is the comparable alternative to conventional way of nitrogen fertilization in the Czech Republic. When growing spring barley the use of this method tends to increase weight of thousand grain and also reduce cover lodging. For winter rape on more fertile soils, CULTAN is capable of getting comparable yields to conventional fertilizing, and improves both economical and environmental effects.
Acknowledgement This work was supported by grant MSM 6046070901, NAZV QH 91081and CIGA 20112033.
References Boelcke, B. 2000. Application of the liquid fertilizer near to the roots. The first experience with the nitrogen fertilizer injection (Depot or CULTAN fertilization), Deutsche Landwirtschaft Zeitschrift 11, 26-30.
Felgentreu, C. 2003. Erste Ergebnisse beim Einsatz des Injektiondüngeverfahren bei Winterraps in Brandenburg, In: Landbauforschung Völkenrode, Anbauverfahren mit N-Injektion (CULTAN) Ergebnisse, Perspektiven, Erfahrungen, Sonderheft 245, 55-60.
Longnecker, N., Kirby, E.J.M. and Robson, A. 1993. Leaf emergence, tiller growth and apical development of nitrogen-deficient spring wheat, Crop Science 1, 154-160.
Peklová, L., Kozlovský, O., Sedlář, O. and Kos, M. 2011a. Plant dry matter production and the nitrogen content in straw and in the seed of winter rape after fertilization by the method CULTAN, In: „The rational use of fertilizers“,Proceedings of 17th Internatinal Conference, Praha, 122-26.
Peklová, L., Balík, J., Kozlovský, O., Sedlář, O. and Kubešová, K. 2011b. The yield and quality of winter oilseed rape in the system of nitrogen fertilizer injection (CULTAN), In: Soil, Plant and Food Interactions, Proceedings of Interantional Conference, Praha, 344-349.
Petr, J., Černý, V. and Hruška, L. 1988. Yield Formation in the Main Field Crops, Elsevier, New York pp 336.
Sedlář, O., Kozlovský, O., Černý, J., Kos, M. and Balík, J. 2009. Yield formation of spring barley grain in the experiment using the CULTAN system, Reasonable Use of Fertilizers, Proceedings of conference, Praha, 129Sedlář, O., Balík, J., Kozlovský, O., Peklová, L. and Kubešová, K. 2011a. Impact of nitrogen fertilizer injection on grain yield and yield formation of spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), Plant, Soil and Environment 12, 547Sedlář, O., Kozlovský, O., Peklová, L. and Kubešová, K. 2011b. Effect of nitrogen injection application on growth progress of spring barley, Agrochémia 2, 11-14.
Sommer, K. 2005. CULTAN-Düngung, Verlag Th. Mann, Gelsenkirchen pp 218.
Knowledge Transfer Oral Presentations Nitrogen Workshop 2012 Effective stakeholder communication: together we stand, divided we fall!
Aarts, H.F.M.a, Humphreys, J.b, Le Gall, A.c a Wageningen-UR (Plant Research International), Wageningen, Netherlands b Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland c Institut de l’Elevage, Paris, France
1. Introduction Research has helped to understand and thereby to improve the functioning of agricultural systems, which are important for human welfare. Further improvements are needed and thought to be possible. The cost-effectiveness of research can be improved by a better understanding of the knowledge requirements of the relevant stakeholders and by a more effective communication of research results. In this paper we tried to analyse the relationships between scientists and stakeholders and to make suggestions about how to increase the effectiveness of their communication. We concluded that we should be better aware of the unique values of verbal conversation as part of the communication system.
2. Interrelationship scientist-stakeholder For a scientist a stakeholder is someone that provides resources to do research (inputs) or that absorbs research results (outputs). Mostly resource providers are the same people or are strongly connected to the people that consume the fruits of scientific work. Such resource providers need research products to improve the effectiveness of their activities and researchers need resources to continue conducting research. While in the short term it can be profitable for a provider to cut investments in research, in the longer term it can be damaging to further business development. For a scientist it can be interesting in the short term to neglect the needs of the resource provider that creates opportunities in order to please another stakeholder, for instance by preparing a paper for a scientific journal or by contributing to a workshop. However, when a scientist neglects the needs of the resource provider for too long or too often the provider will stop providing resources. So researchers and their stakeholders depend on each other. If one goes down, the other will go down also, perhaps after a short period of increased happiness. Effective cooperation is essential for sustainable functioning of both. However, certain elements of the behaviour of researchers and stakeholders can threaten this cooperation.
3. Species of scientists and stakeholders There are different categories of researchers. Roughly they can be divided in 3 species, depending on their habitat: 1) universities or public research institutes for basic research, 2) applied research organizations and 3) research departments of commercial companies. There are also different types of stakeholders: 1) farmers and farming industry, 2) government departments and agencies and 3) scientific journals. They all have their specific needs, culture and thereby behaviour. Farmers and farming industry like to implement knowledge and innovations to optimize their businesses. In general this leads to a better utilization of resources, including land and labour. Also governments want to optimize farming practices and farming industry as it leads to higher employment, gains through direct and indirect taxes due to increased productivity, resulting in better welfare of the general voting public. Furthermore, governments want to sustain or improve the quality of environment by legislation. Appropriate knowledge is needed to ensure that appropriate legislation is put in place. Such knowledge can include, for instance, the level of acceptable nutrient losses or the cost-effectiveness of measures to prevent pollution. Farmers, farming industries and
Nitrogen Workshop 2012
governments supply money and sometimes also research facilities, like experimental farms, or means of dissemination and communication such as newspapers, magazines or websites.
Scientific journals are quite different from the other stakeholders. They are interested in originalities in science, mostly not in their applicability in systems of agricultural production. They provide possibilities to scientist to increase their scientific status (citation index), which helps in the acquisition of new funding opportunities from funding agencies. Scientific journals don’t supply resources for research. They only supply possibilities to spread research results with the scientific society as the target group.
4. Knowledge requirements of stakeholders For academic or basic researchers the number of published refereed publications is an important indicator for success. For scientific journals originality of contributions is essential but it becomes more and more difficult to check the originality of offered papers, mostly describing very detailed research. There is no database to control. Mostly 2 or 3 reviewers are asked by the editor to give their opinion about originality and quality. The editor has to base his judgment to publish or not on their advice. It is more and more difficult to find qualified experts to review adequately. Usually, they are not paid by the journal, so the cost of their time spent reviewing has to be paid by other funders or by themselves. Consequently chance can often play an important role in acceptance of an offered manuscript. Communication between editors, reviewers and contributing scientists is only by internet applications and standardised by strict formats. Verbal conversation is excluded. With this ‘efficient’ communication system there is a high risk that ‘old’ knowledge will be published as ‘new’ without being recognized as such.
Governments require knowledge, mainly for legislation purposes and to help farmers and farming industry to solve problems and to stay competitive. A problem is that people working for the government nowadays often don’t have an education in agricultural or environmental sciences.
Often they studied economics, politics or communication. Besides they usually change jobs every 3 or 4 years. Communication with scientists is often by calls for research and (in return) by reports.