Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Soil denitrification response to increased urea concentration constrains nitrous oxide emissions in a simulated cattle urine patch

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Plant and Soil Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract 

Aim

Incorporating non-bloat legumes into grass pastures can reduce enteric methane and alter cattle urinary urea N output by increasing protein intake. Deposition of high urea N urine influences soil N-cycling microbes and potentially N2O production. We studied how urine urea N concentration affects soil nitrifier and denitrifier abundances, activities, and N2O production.

Methods

15N13C-labelled urea dissolved in cattle urine was added at 3.5 and 7.0 g L−1 to soils from a grazed, non-bloat legume pasture and incubated under controlled conditions. CO2, N2O, 13C-CO2, and 15N-N2O production were quantified over 240 h, along with nitrifier and denitrifier N-cycling genes and mRNA transcripts.

Results

High urea urine increased total N2O relative to the control; low urea was not significantly different from the control or the high urea treatment. As a result, N2O-N emission factors were not significantly different between the low urea treatment (1.17%) and high urea treatment (0.94%). Doubling urea concentration doubled CO2-Curea and N2O-Nurea but not total N2O-N. Urine addition initially inhibited then increased AOB transcripts and gene abundances. nirK and nirS transcript abundances indicated that denitrification by ammonia oxidizers and/or heterotrophic denitrifiers dominated N2O production. Urine addition increased nosZ-II vs. nosZ-I transcripts, improving soil N2O reduction potential.

Conclusion

Characterizing this interplay between nitrifiers and denitrifiers improves the understanding of urine patch N2O sinks and source dynamics. This mechanistic information helps to explain the constrained short-term N2O emissions observed in response to excess urine N excretion from cattle consuming high protein diets, e.g. non-bloat legumes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to the Prairie Environmental Agronomy Research Lab (PEARL) for greenhouse gas analyses. Thank you to the many University of Saskatchewan Department of Soil Science research technicians and students who assisted with technical advice and sampling.

Funding

Funding for this research was provided by the Canadian Agricultural Partnership through the Agriculture Greenhouse Gases Program (AGGP II, grant number AGGP 2–011) and Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council Discovery Grants to MMA (RGPIN-2016–04968) and BLH (RGPIN-2019–04158). The funding sources had no involvement in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript writing, or the decision to publish.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

JCR conceived and designed the study, set up and conducted the experiment, performed laboratory and data analyses, and wrote the original draft of the manuscript; MMA and BLH conceived and designed the study, supervised the experiment, and reviewed and edited the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Jesse C. Reimer or Melissa M. Arcand.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no known competing interests.

Additional information

Responsible Editor: Kari Dunfield.

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 91 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Reimer, J.C., Arcand, M.M. & Helgason, B.L. Soil denitrification response to increased urea concentration constrains nitrous oxide emissions in a simulated cattle urine patch. Plant Soil 498, 125–145 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-023-06048-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-023-06048-w

Keywords

Navigation