Effects of urea micronized sulfur combined with urease and nitrification inhibitors on nitrogen transformation, losses, and crop response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract While fertilizers are vital for food production, their environmental and health impacts require continual advancement. This study explored new micronized sulfur-containing nitrogen fertilizers (UREA-ES) that offer potential benefits compared to traditional options. The objective was to understand the transformation and loss pathways of UREA-ES, such as 40-0-0-13 (UREA-ES40) and 11-0-0-75 (UREA-ES11) in two different soils. This study evaluated the transformation and loss pathways of nitrogen (N) from the above fertilizers with and without urease (UI) and nitrification (NI) inhibitors in comparison to urea. Results of the study showed that the UREA-ES fertilizers had lower and delayed ammonia (NH 3 ) volatilization compared to urea treatment (UREA). The use of UI with UREA-ES fertilizers reduced NH 3 volatilization losses more effectively than UI with UREA, indicating potential synergies between UI and sulfur (S). The hydrolysis of UREA-ES fertilizers was slowed down by the UI under both acidic and alkaline conditions, similar to UREA fertilizer. The coating of UREA-ES fertilizers with UI + NI significantly delayed NH 4 + nitrification. Coating UREA-ES fertilizers with UI or UI + NI delayed nitrate leaching losses, indicating prolonged N availability in the soil. These results were corroborated by a greenhouse sorghum study where UREA-ES fertilizers with UI or UI + NI led to higher total N uptake and higher grain yield than UREA fertilizer with UI or UI + NI. UREA-ES fertilizers also resulted in higher total S uptake by sorghum, indicating improved S nutrition. Overall, the study revealed UREA-ES fertilizers had significantly improved total N uptake by sorghum and had significantly higher grain yields, especially at lower N application rates due to decreased N losses. Both UI and NI showed potential benefits for UREA-ES fertilizers compared to traditional UREA, including reduced NH 3 volatilization losses, delayed nitrate formation, and enhanced N uptake by plants, resulting in increased grain yields, especially at the lower N application rate (75 kg N ha⁻ 1 ).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".