Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of two versions of the acetylene inhibition/soil core method for measuring denitrification loss from an irrigated wheat field

  • SHORT COMMUNICATION
  • Published:
Biology and Fertility of Soils Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

 Two versions of the acetylene inhibition (AI)/soil core method were compared for the measurement of denitrification loss from an irrigated wheat field receiving urea-N at a rate of 100 kg ha–1. With AI/soil core method A, the denitrification rate was measured by analysing the headspace N2O, followed by estimation of N2O dissolved in the solution phase using Bunsen absorption coefficients. With AI/soil core method B, N2O entrapped in the soil was measured in addition to that released from soil cores into the headspace of incubation vessels. In addition, the two methods were also compared for measurement of the soil respiration rate. Of the total N2O produced, 6–77% (average 40%) remained entrapped in the soil, whereas for CO2, the corresponding figures ranged from 12–65% (average 44%). The amount of the entrapped N2O was significantly correlated with the water-filled pore space (WFPS) and with the N2O concentration in the headspace, whereas CO2 entrapment was dependent on the headspace CO2 concentration but not on the WFPS. Due to the entrapment of N2O and CO2 in soil, the denitrification rate on several (18 of the 41) sampling dates, and soil respiration rate on almost all (27 of the 30) sampling dates were significantly higher with method B compared to method A. Averaged across sampling dates, the denitrification rate measured with method B (0.30 kg N ha–1 day–1) was twice the rate measured with method A, whereas the soil respiration rate measured with method B (34.9 kg C ha–1 day–1) was 1.6 times the rate measured with method A. Results of this study suggest that the N2O and CO2 entrapped in soil should also be measured to ensure the recovery of the gaseous products of denitrification by the soil core method.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Received: 12 May 1998

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mahmood, T., Ali, R., Azam, F. et al. Comparison of two versions of the acetylene inhibition/soil core method for measuring denitrification loss from an irrigated wheat field. Biol Fertil Soils 29, 328–331 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s003740050560

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s003740050560

Navigation