Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-kl2l2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-23T05:55:56.179Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of sulphur-coated urea fertilizers in savannah soils: 1. Response of cotton and sorghum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

L. A. Nnadi  and
S. M. Abed
L. A. Nnadi
Affiliation:
Institute for Agricultural Research, Zaria, Nigeria
S. M. Abed
Affiliation:
Institute for Agricultural Research, Zaria, Nigeria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Two sources of sulphur-coated urea (SCU) were compared with calcium ammonium nitrate (CAN) as sources of N for cotton and sorghum in the savannah zone of Nigeria. At the lowest rate of N application (30 kg/ha for cotton and 40 kg/ha for sorghum), SCU-11 with a dissolution rate of 11% in 7 days was found to be more effective than SCU-30 having a dissolution rate of 30% in 7 days and CAN. A single application of SCU-11 produced a higher sorghum yield than a divided application of CAN at the same rate. These results indicate that a slow-release nitrogen fertilizer might be useful for improved grain sorghum and cotton varieties.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 101 , Issue 1 , August 1983 , pp. 119 - 123
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allen, S. E., Terman, G. L. & Hunt, C. M. (1971). Soluble and slow-release nitrogen fertilizer effects on grass forage as influenced by rate and placement. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 77, 394–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, R. B. & Myers, F. J. (1972). Crop response and related benefits from SCU. Sulphur Institute Journal 8 (4), 9–11.Google Scholar
Goldsworthy, P. R. & Palmer, J. L. (1971). Fertilizer trials with sprayed and unsprayed cotton in Nigeria. Experimental Agriculture 7, 281–287.Google Scholar
International Fertilizer Development Center, (1977). Progress Report, p. 16. IFDC, Muscle Shoals, Alabama, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Jones, M. J. (1977). Effect of three nitrogen fertilizers and lime on pH and exchangeable cation content at different depths at two sites in the Nigerian savanna. Tropical Agriculture, Trinidad 53, 243–254.Google Scholar
Klinkenberg, K. & Higgins, G. M. (1968). An outline of northern Nigerian soils. Nigerian Journal of Science 2, 91–115.Google Scholar
Kowal, J. (1968). Some physical properties of soils at Samaru, Zaria, Nigeria: storage of water and its use by crops. 1. Physical status of soils. Nigerian Agricultural Journal 5(1), 13–20.Google Scholar
Liegel, E. L. & Walsh, L. M. (1976). Evaluation of sulphur-coated urea (SCU) applied to irrigated potatoes and corn. Agronomy Journal 68, 457–463.Google Scholar
Lombin, L. G. & Ogunlela, V. B. (1979). Time and rate of nitrogen application to cotton in the savanna areas of Nigeria. Indian Journal of Agricultural Science 49, 665–673.Google Scholar
Lunt, O. R. (1968). Modified sulphur-coated granular urea for controlled nutrient release. International Congress of Soil Science, 9th Transactions 3, 377–383.Google Scholar
Mays, D. A. (1970). Sulphur-coated urea, a slow-release nitrogen source for grass. Proceedings of XI International Grassland Congress, Queensland, Australia, pp. 428–430.Google Scholar
Ojanuga, A. G., Valette, J., Khwaja, I. A. (1979). Seventh Annual Joint Meeting of the National Soil Correlation and the Soil Science Society of Nigeria, Kano, 70 pp.Google Scholar
Shelton, J. E. (1976). An evaluation of sulphur-coated urea as a preplant total season nitrogen supply for trellised tomatoes. Soil Science Society of America Journal 40, 126–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wild, A. (1971). The potassium status of soils in the savanna zone of Nigeria. Experimental Agriculture 7, 257–270.Google Scholar