Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Plant Science Today (PST)

Research Articles

Vol. 12 No. 1 (2025)

Evaluating the impact of an organic nitrification inhibitor on nitrogen availability and its influence on microbial population in paddy soil

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.6652
Submitted
11 December 2024
Published
13-02-2025 — Updated on 23-02-2025
Versions

Abstract

An incubation study was conducted to estimate the potential inhibition rates of nitrification using phytonim-coated fertilizers like urea and ammonium sulfate (AS) at different concentrations viz., 100 % and 65 % of the recommended dosage (RD) and additionally ammonifying bacteria (AB) was added with urea as one of the treatments. Samples were taken at 13 different intervals in a 45-day incubation experiment. Applying phytonim-coated fertilizers delayed the nitrification process for 35 days, improving the soils' available N. Ammonia oxidation and nitrite oxidation rates were reduced by 14 % and 35 % in phytonim-coated urea, 11 % and 23 % in phytonim-coated urea + AB and 24 % and 45 % in phytonim-coated AS, respectively over uncoated fertilizers. Nitrate reductase activity was reduced by 17 %, 16 % and 21 % in phytonim-coated fertilizers like urea, AS and urea + AB compared to uncoated fertilizers. Soil urease activity was inhibited in phytonim-coated urea (100 % RD and 65 % RD) of 9.6 % and 7.4 %, respectively, whereas 5.7 % and 6.7 % increased urease activity were observed in phytonim-coated urea + AB (100 % RD) and coated urea + AB (65 % RD). Increased soil dehydrogenase activity and FDA hydrolysis of 20 % and 15 % were observed in phytonim-coated urea, 15 % and 18 % in phytonim-coated urea + AB (100 % RD) and 17 % and 16 % in phytonim-coated AS over uncoated fertilizers. Results show that phytonim-coated AS (100 % RD) (T8) has inhibited nitrification most, followed by phytonim-coated urea (100 % RD) (T4) during the incubation period. This study concludes that applying organic nitrification inhibitors inhibited the nitrification and denitrification rates, affected the urea hydrolysis and positively affected the microbial population.

References

  1. Xu X, Liu Y, Singh BP, Yang Q, Zhang Q, Wang H, et al. NosZ clade II rather than clade I determine in situ N2O emissions with different fertilizer types under simulated climate change and its legacy. Soil Biol Biochem. 2020;150:107974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2020.107974
  2. Engelhardt IC, Niklaus PA, Bizouard F, Breuil MC, Rouard N, Deau F, et al. Precipitation patterns and N availability alter plant-soil microbial C and N dynamics. Plant Soil. 2021;466(1):151?63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-021-05015-7
  3. Liu Y, Tang H, Muhammad A, Huang G. Emission mechanism and reduction countermeasures of agricultural greenhouse gases – a review. Green house Gases Sci. 2019;9(2):160?74. https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.1848
  4. Forster P, Ramaswamy V, Artaxo P, Berntsen T, Betts R, Fahey DW. Changes in atmospheric constituents and in radiative forcing. In: Solomon SD, et al. editors. Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. contribution of working group i to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2007.
  5. Zhang X, Zou T, Lassaletta L, Mueller ND, Tubiello FN, Lisk MD, et al. Quantification of global and national nitrogen budgets for crop production. Nat Food. 2021;2(7):529?40. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00318-5
  6. Lu C, Tian H. Global nitrogen and phosphorus fertilizer use for agriculture production in the past half century: shifted hot spots and nutrient imbalance. Earth System Science Data. 2017;9(1):181–92. https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-9-181-2017
  7. Ghaly AE, Ramakrishnan VV. Nitrogen sources and cycling in the ecosystem and its role in air, water and soil pollution: A critical review. J Pollution Effects Control. 2015;3(2):1–26. https://doi.org/10.4172/2375-4397.1000136
  8. Wu L, Ning D, Zhang B, Li Y, Zhang P, Shan X, et al. Global diversity and biogeography of bacterial communities in wastewater treatment plants. Nat Microbiol. 2019;4(7):1183–95. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41564-019-0426-5
  9. Raza S, Jiang Y, Elrys AS, Tao J, Liu Z, Li Z, et al. Dicyandiamide efficacy of inhibiting nitrification and carbon dioxide emission from calcareous soil depends on temperature and moisture contents. Arch Agron Soil Sci. 2022;68(10):1413–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/03650340.2021.1895432
  10. Subbarao GV, Sahrawat KL, Nakahara K, Ishikawa T, Kishii M, Rao IM, et al. Biological nitrification inhibition—a novel strategy to regulate nitrification in agricultural systems. Adv Agron. 2012;114:249–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394275-3.00001-8
  11. Singh UV. Studies on better utilization of nonedible oil seed cakes, karanja (Pongamia glabra) seed cake. New Delhi: Indian Agric Res Institute; 1966
  12. Krishnapillai S. Inhibition of nitrification by waste tea (Tea Fluff). Plant Soil. 1979;51:563–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02277576
  13. Kowalchuk GA, Stephen JR. Ammonia-oxidizing bacteria: a model for molecular microbial ecology. Ann Rev Microbiol. 2001;55(1):485–529. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.micro.55.1.485
  14. Singh DK, Kumar S. Nitrate reductase, arginine deaminase, urease and dehydrogenase activities in natural soil (ridges with forest) and in cotton soil after acetamiprid treatments. Chemosphere. 2008;71(3):412–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.11.005
  15. Quilchano C, Maranon T. Dehydrogenase activity in Mediterranean forest soils. Biol Fert Soils. 2002;35:102–07. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-002-0446-8
  16. Alkorta I, Aizpurua A, Riga P, Albizu I, Amézaga I, Garbisu C. Soil enzyme activities as biological indicators of soil health. Rev on Environ Health. 2003;18(1):65–73. https://doi.org/10.1515/REVEH.2003.18.1.65
  17. Wijayanti EB, Setiadi DR, Setyoko BH. Dataset analysis and feature characteristics to predict rice production based on eXtreme gradient boosting. J Computing Theo Appl. 2024;1(3):299?310. https://doi.org/10.62411/jcta.10057
  18. Satish S, Bandumula N, Pathak HA. Season-wise analysis of the extent of adoption of popular rice varieties in Telangana, India. J Exp Agr Int. 2024;46(6):208–14. https://doi.org/10.9734/jeai/2024/v46i62472
  19. .19. Groffman PM, Tiedje JM. Denitrification in north temperate forest soils: Spatial and temporal patterns at the landscape and seasonal scales. Soil Biol Biochem. 1989;21(5):613–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(89)90053-9
  20. Narayanasamy S, Thankappan S, Kumaravel S, Ragupathi S, Uthandi S. Complete genome sequence analysis of a plant growth-promoting phylloplane Bacillus altitudinis FD48 offers mechanistic insights into priming drought stress tolerance in rice. Genomics. 2023;115(1):110550. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygeno.2022.110550
  21. Kurola J, Salkinoja-Salonen M, Aarnio T, Hultman J, Romantschuk M. Activity, diversity and population size of ammonia-oxidizing bacteria in oil-contaminated landfarming soil. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.femsle.2005.06.057
  22. Wertz S, Degrange V, Prosser JI, Poly F, Commeaux C, Guillaumaud N, et al. Decline of soil microbial diversity does not influence the resistance and resilience of key soil microbial functional groups following a model disturbance. Environ Microbiol. 2007;9(9):2211–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1462-2920.2007.01335.x
  23. Abdelmagid HM, Tabatabai MA. Nitrate reductase activity of soils. Soil Biol Biochem. 1987;19(4):421–27.https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(87)90033-2
  24. Casida LE, Klein DA, Santoro T. Soil dehydrogenase activity. Soil Sci. 1964;98(6):371–76. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-196412000-00004
  25. McGarity JW, Myers MG. A survey of urease activity in soils of Northern New South Wales. Plant Soil. 1967;217–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01373391
  26. Prosser JA, Speir TW, Stott DE. Soil oxidoreductases and FDA hydrolysis. In: Richard P. Dick, editor. Methods of Soil Enzymology. New york:Wiley; 2015. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser9.c6
  27. Norton JM, Stark JM. Regulation and measurement of nitrification in terrestrial systems. Methods Enzymol. 2011;486:343–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-381294-0.00015-8
  28. Lu Y, Zhang X, Jiang J, Kronzucker HJ, Shen W, Shi W. Effects of the biological nitrification inhibitor 1,9-decanediol on nitrification and ammonia oxidizers in three agricultural soils. Soil Biol Biochem. 2019;129:48–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.11.008
  29. Gao S, Zhou G, Rees RM, Cao W. Green manuring inhibits nitrification in a typical paddy soil by changing the contributions of ammonia-oxidizing archaea and bacteria. Appl Soil Ecol. 2020;156:103698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2020.103698
  30. HaiJun ZH, ZhiJie WZ, QiXing ZQ. Dicyandiamide sorption-desorption behavior on soils and peat humus. Pedosphere. 2004;14(3):395–99.
  31. Li C, Hu HW, Chen QL, Chen D, He JZ. Growth of comammox Nitrospira is inhibited by nitrification inhibitors in agricultural soils. J Soils Sediments. 2020;20:621–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-019-02442-z
  32. Li S, Chen D, Wang C, Chen D, Wang Q. Reduced nitrification by biochar and/or nitrification inhibitor is closely linked with the abundance of comammox Nitrospira in a highly acidic sugarcane soil. Biol Fertil Soils. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-020-01499-0
  33. Fettweis U, Mittelstaedt W, Schimansky C, Führ F. Lysimeter experiments on the translocation of the carbon-14-labelled nitrification inhibitor 3,4-dimethylpyrazole phosphate (DMPP) in a gleyic cambisol. Biol Fertil Soils. 2001. https://doi.org/10.1007/s003740100385
  34. Zhu JG, Liu G, Han Y, Zhang YL, Xing GX. Nitrate distribution and denitrification in the saturated zone of paddy field under rice/wheat rotation. Chemosphere. 2003;50(6):725–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0045-6535(02)00212-6
  35. Patra AK, Chhonkar PK, Khan MA. Effect of green manure Sesbania sesban and nitrification inhibitor encapsulated calcium carbide (ECC) on soil mineral-N, enzyme activity and nitrifying organisms in a rice–wheat cropping system. Eur J Soil Biol. 2006;42(3):173 80.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejsobi.2005.12.007
  36. Datta A, Adhya TK. Effects of organic nitrification inhibitors on methane and nitrous oxide emission from tropical rice paddy. Atmos Environ. 2014;92:533–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2014.04.009
  37. Lu Y, Li D, Li C, Sun M, Wu Z, Sun Z. The effects of 3,5-dimethylpyrazole on soil nitrification and related enzyme activities in brown soil. Agron. 2022;12(6):1425. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12061425
  38. Li H, Liang X, Chen Y, Lian Y, Tian G, Ni W. Effect of nitrification inhibitor DMPP on nitrogen leaching, nitrifying organisms and enzyme activities in a rice-oilseed rape cropping system. J Environ Sci. 2008;20(2):149–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(08)60023-6
  39. Adetunji AT, Ncube B, Mulidzi R, Lewu FB. Potential use of soil enzymes as soil quality indicators in agriculture. In: Kumar SN, Bibhuti BM, editors. Front in Soil and Environ Microbio. Boca Raton:CRC Press; 2020. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429485794-6
  40. Camberato JJ. Nitrogen in soil and fertilizers. SC Turfgrass Found News. 2001;8:6–10.
  41. Bolton H, Elliott LF, Papendick RI, Bezdicek DF. Soil microbial biomass and selected soil enzyme activities: effect of fertilization and cropping practices. Soil Biol Biochem. 1985. https://doi.org/10.1016/0038-0717(85)90064-1
  42. Maini A, Sharma V, Sharma S. Assessment of soil carbon and biochemical indicators of soil quality under rainfed land use systems in North Eastern region of Punjab, India. Carbon Manag. 2020 Mar 3;11(2):169–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/17583004.2020.1721976
  43. Ullah S, Ali I, Yang M, Zhao Q, Iqbal A, Wu X, et al. Partial substitution of urea with biochar induced improvements in soil enzymes activity, ammonia-nitrite oxidizers and nitrogen uptake in the double-cropping rice system. Microorganisms. 2023;11(2):527. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms11020527
  44. Tindaon F, Benckiser G, Ottow CG. Side effects of nitrification inhibitors on non target microbial processes in soils. J Trop Soils. 2013. https://doi.org/10.5400/jts.2011.v16i1.7-16
  45. Schnurer J, Rosswall T. Fluorescein diacetate hydrolysis as a measure of total microbial activity in soil and litter. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1982;43(6):1256.61.https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.43.6.1256-1261.1982
  46. Weaver MA, Krutz LJ, Zablotowicz RM, Reddy KN. Effects of glyphosate on soil microbial communities and its mineralization in a Mississippi soil. Pest Manag Sci. 2007;63(4):388–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.1351
  47. Bhattacharyya P, Mitra A, Chakrabarti K, Chattopadhyay DJ, Chakraborty A, Kim K. Effect of heavy metals on microbial biomass and activities in century old landfill soil. Environ Monit Assess. 2007;136:299–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-007-9685-3
  48. Petersen S, Henriksen K, Mortensen G, Krogh P, Brandt K, Sørensen J, et al. Recycling of sewage sludge and household compost to arable land: fate and effects of organic contaminants and impact on soil fertility. Soil Tillage Res. 2003;72(2):139–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(03)00084-9
  49. Davies B, Coulter JA, Pagliari PH. Soil enzyme activity behavior after urea nitrogen application. Plants. 2022;11(17):2247. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11172247
  50. Kong X, Duan Y, Schramm A, Eriksen J, Petersen SO. 3,4-Dimethylpyrazole phosphate (DMPP) reduces activity of ammonia oxidizers without adverse effects on non-target soil microorganisms and functions. Appl Soil Ecol. 2016;105:67–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2016.03.018

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.