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

Research Articles

Vol. 13 No. sp9 (2026): Recent Advances in Agriculture

Evaluating the nitrogen substitution potential of nano-urea for improving growth kinetics, yield attributes and productivity of maize in acidic soils

DOI
https://doi.org/10.14719/pst.15414
Submitted
6 May 2026
Published
12-11-2026

Abstract

Nitrogen (N) management remains a critical agronomic challenge due to various losses such as leaching and volatilisation which necessitate more efficient delivery mechanisms especially in acidic soils. This study investigated the N substitution potential of nano-urea in maize (Zea mays L.) cultivated under acidic soil conditions. A field experiment was conducted using a randomised complete block design with 12 treatments which compared varying levels 0 %, 50 %, 75 % and 100 % of the recommended dose of nitrogen (RDN) applied either alone or in combination with foliar sprays of nano-urea or 2 % conventional prilled urea solution. Growth kinetics revealed that the combined application of 100 % RDN with nano-urea consistently maximised crop growth rate, net assimilation rate and leaf area duration. Importantly, reducing the basal N dose to 75 % RDN while supplementing with foliar nano-urea produced physiological responses and grain yield (5.79 t ha-1) which was statistically comparable to the 100 % RDN (6.24 t ha-1). This demonstrates a 25 % RDN substitution without incurring agronomic penalties. Furthermore, this 25 % N substitution approach optimised nitrogen use efficiency (NUE); the agronomic efficiency (AE) and apparent recovery efficiency (RE) of the 75 % RDN plus nano-urea treatment remained statistically comparable to the 100 % RDN. Pearson’s correlation analysis confirms that the enhancement of growth kinetics through nano-urea directly translated into improved sink capacity and final grain yield. In contrast, conventional 2 % prilled urea sprays showed high variability and failed to provide statistically at par results. Economic analysis indicated that the 75 % RDN plus nano-urea strategy maintained net returns and a benefit-cost (B:C) ratio statistically at par to the 100 % RDN. These findings suggest that integrating foliar nano-urea with reduced N applications represents an efficient and sustainable nutrient management strategy for maize in acidic soils, reducing the economic burden and environmental footprint of excessive soil N applications while sustaining overall profitability.

References

  1. 1. Deng T, Wang JH, Gao Z, Shen S, Liang XG, Zhao X, et al. Late split-application with reduced nitrogen fertiliser increases yield by mediating source–sink relations during the grain filling stage in summer maize. Plants. 2023;12(3):625. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12030625
  2. 2. Javed T, Singhal RK, Shabbir R, Shah AN, Kumar P, Jinger D, et al. Recent advances in agronomic and physio-molecular approaches for improving nitrogen use efficiency in crop plants. Front Plant Sci. 2022;13:877544. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2022.877544
  3. 3. Hearn LO, Barton L, Schwenke GD, Murphy DV. Ammonia volatilisation losses from urea applied to acidic cropping soils is regulated by pH buffering capacity. Soil Res. 2023;61(7):685–96. https://doi.org/10.1071/SR23044
  4. 4. Channapur AM, Kumar S, Kumar B, Singh P, Abhijith KP, Singh R, et al. Genetic dissection of seedling root architecture under aluminium toxicity in tropical maize (Zea mays L.). Front Plant Sci. 2026;16:1722162.
  5. 5. Cezar JV, Morais EG, Lima JD, Benevenute PA, Guilherme LR. Iodine-enriched urea reduces volatilisation and improves nitrogen uptake in maize plants. Nitrogen. 2024;5(4):891–902.https://doi.org/10.3390/nitrogen5040057
  6. 6. Parameshnaik C, Murthy KK, Hanumanthappa D, Seenappa C, Reddy YN, Prakasha H. Influence of nano fertilisers on growth and yield of maize. Mysore J Agric Sci. 2024;58(1):211–21.
  7. 7. Singh RK, Upadhyay PK, Hasanain M, Shekhawat K, Rathore SS, Meena VS, et al. Nano-urea driven improvements in nitrogen efficiency and wheat productivity: Trade-offs, synergies and climate resilience pathways. Front Sustain Food Syst. 2025;9:1670081. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2025.1670081
  8. 8. Radford PJ. Growth analysis formulae-their use and abuse 1. Crop Sci. 1967;7(3):171–5. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci1967.0011183X000700030001x
  9. 9. Hunt R, Causton DR, Shipley B, Askew AP. A modern tool for classical plant growth analysis. Ann Bot. 2002;90(4):485–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcf214
  10. 10. Gomez KA, Gomez AA. Statistical procedures for agricultural research. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1984.
  11. 11. R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2020. https://www.R-project.org/
  12. 12. Wickham H. Data analysis. In: ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2016. p. 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4_9
  13. 13. Wei T, Simko V. corrplot: Visualisation of a correlation matrix. CRAN: Contributed Packages; 2010. https://doi.org/10.32614/CRAN.package.corrplot
  14. 14. Pandey NP, Mishra US, Sirothia P, Govind. Synergistic effect of conventional and nano urea on growth, yield and economics of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) in the Chitrakoot region. Int J Plant Soil Sci. 2026;38(2):142–9. https://doi.org/10.9734/ijpss/2026/v38i25972
  15. 15. Zhou L, Shen D, Wang K, Ming B, Fang L, Wang Z, et al. Impact of planting density and nitrogen application on maize source-sink relationships and yield under drip irrigation. J Agric Food Res. 2025;21:102000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2025.102000
  16. 16. Vasanth P, Sivakumar K, Jeyajothi R, Chandrasekaran P. Foliar spray of urea and nano-urea on the growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.). Int J Res Agron. 2024;7(8S):428–31.https://doi.org/10.33545/2618060X.2024.v7.i8Sf.1288
  17. 17. Borrás L, Vitantonio-Mazzini LN. Maize reproductive development and kernel set under limited plant growth environments. J Exp Bot. 2018;69(13):3235–43. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erx452
  18. 18. Upadhyay PK, Dey A, Singh VK, Dwivedi BS, Singh T, Rajanna GA, et al. Conjoint application of nano-urea with conventional fertilisers: An energy efficient and environmentally robust approach for sustainable crop production. PLoS One. 2023;18(7):e0284009. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284009
  19. 19. Peramaiyan P, Reddy KS, Kumar S, Srivastava AK, Nath D, Kumar V, et al. Assessing the scope for nano-urea to reduce nitrogen inputs while maintaining rice yields in India. Front Sustain Food Syst. 2026;10:1759447. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2026.1759447
  20. 20. Qureshi A, Singh DK, Dwivedi S. Nano-fertilisers: a novel way for enhancing nutrient use efficiency and crop productivity. Int J Curr Microbiol Appl Sci. 2018;7(2):3325–35. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2018.702.398
  21. 21. Babu S, Singh R, Yadav D, Rathore SS, Raj R, Avasthe R, et al. Nanofertilisers for agricultural and environmental sustainability. Chemosphere. 2022;292:133451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.133451
  22. 22. Kumar Y, Tiwari KN, Singh T, Sain NK, Laxmi S, Verma RA, et al. Nanofertilisers for enhancing nutrient use efficiency, crop productivity and economic returns in winter season crops of Rajasthan. Ann Plant Soil Res. 2020;22(4):324–35.https://doi.org/10.47815/apsr.2020.10001
  23. 23. Upadhyay PK, Singh VK, Rajanna GA, Dwivedi BS, Dey A, Singh RK, et al. Unveiling the combined effect of nano fertilisers and conventional fertilisers on crop productivity, profitability and soil well-being. Front Sustain Food Syst. 2023;7:1260178.https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1260178
  24. 24. Koireng RJ, Lhamu S, Maheshwari K, Oinam T, Dinesh GK, Siram O. Application of nano-urea improves productivity, quality and economics of fodder maize (Zea mays L.) in Manipur, a Northeastern hill region of India. J Innov Agric. 2025;12(4):1–9. https://doi.org/10.37446/jinagri/rsa/12.4.2025.1-9

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.