Plant and Soil

, Volume 91, Issue 3, pp 313–318 | Cite as

Nitrate and ammonium absorption by plants growing at a sufficient or insufficient level of phosphorus in nutrient solutions

  • J. K. Schjørring
Article

Summary

Absorption of nitrate and ammonium was studied in water culture experiments with 4 to 6 weeks old plants of barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum L. Moench) and rape (Brassica napus L.). The plants were grown in a complete nutrient solution with nitrate (5.7±0.2 mM) or nitrate (5.6±0.2 mM) + ammonium (0.04±0.02 mM). The pH of the nutrient solution was kept at 5.0 using a pH-stat. It was found that phosphorus deficiency reduced the rate of nitrate uptake by 58±3% when nitrate was the sole N source and by 83±1% when both nitrate and ammonium were present. The reduction occurred even before growth was significantly impeded by P deficiency. The inhibition of the uptake of ammonium was less,i.e. ammonium constituted 10±1% of the total N uptake in the P sufficient plants and 30±5% in the P deficient plants. The reduction of nitrate absorption greatly decreased the difference between the uptake of anions and cations. It is suggested that P deficiency reduced the assimilation of NO3 into the proteins, which might cause a negative feedback on NO3 influx and/or stimulate NO3 efflux.

Key words

Ammonium uptake Barley Brassica napus L. Buckwheat Cation-anion balance Fagopyrum esculentum Moench Hordeum vulgare L. Nitrate uptake Phosphorus Rape 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Barber S A 1985 Soil Nutrient Bioavailability. A mechanistic approach. John Wiley and Sons, New York, 398 p.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Clarkson D T and Warner A J 1979 Plant Physiol. 64, 557–561.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Deane-Drummond C E and Glass A D M 1983 Plant Physiol. 73, 100–104.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Deane-Drummond C E and Glass A D M 1983 Plant Physiol. 73, 105–110.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hedley M J, Nye P H and White R E 1982 New Phytol. 91, 31–44.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hedley M J, Nye P H and White R E 1982 New Phytol. 95, 69–82.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jackson W A 1978In Nitrogen in the Environment. Eds. D R Nielsen and J G MacDonald. Vol II, Academic Press, New York, pp 353–359.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    MacKown C T, Jackson W A and Volk R J 1982 Plant Physiol. 69, 353–359.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mengel K and Kirkby E A 1982 Principles of Plant Nutrition. International Potash Insitute, Worblau-Bern. 655 p.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Munn D A and Jackson W A 1978 Agron. J. 70, 312–316.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Newman E I 1966 J. Appl. Ecol. 3, 139–145.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reisenauer H M 1978In Nitrogen in the Environment. Eds. D R Nielsen and J G MacDonald. Vol. II, Academic Press, New York. pp 157–170.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schjørring J K and Jensén P 1984 Physiol. Plant. 61, 577–583.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Syrett P J 1981In Physiological Bases of Phytoplankton Ecology. Ed. T Platt. Canadian Bulletin of Fisheries and Aquatic Science, No 210. pp 182–210.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Van Beusichem M L 1982 Neth. J. Agric. Sci. 30, 85–97.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. K. Schjørring
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Soil Fertility and Plant NutritionThe Royal Veterinary and Agricultural UniversityCopenhagen VDenmark

Personalised recommendations