TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of nitrogen fertilisation recommendations of West European Countries
AU - Jordan-Meille, Lionel
AU - Denoroy, Pascal
AU - Dittert, Klaus
AU - Cugnon, Thibaut
AU - Quemada, Miguel
AU - Wall, David
AU - Bechini, Luca
AU - Marx, Simone
AU - Oenema, Oene
AU - Reijneveld, Arjan
AU - Liebisch, Frank
AU - Diedhiou, Khady
AU - Degan, Francesca
AU - Higgins, Suzanne
PY - 2023/11/1
Y1 - 2023/11/1
N2 - Nitrogen (N) budgets at farm level are influenced by N fertilisation recommendations. In this study, we reviewed and analysed the underlying principles and methods of N fertilisation recommendations in 10 West European countries, to identify similarities and differences, and develop suggestions for reconsideration and improvement. An analysis of national official documents on N fertilisation recommendations revealed that there were three main categories of calculation methods: (i) ‘N mass balances’ (France, Italy, Spain), (ii) ‘Corrected standards’ (Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, Luxembourg), and (iii) ‘Pre-parameterised calculations’, which rely on a soil N supply typology (United Kingdom, Ireland, Belgium). In total 16 variables were identified in the calculation methods. The more complex methods use 10 (Italy, France), while the simplest only rely on 3 (Luxembourg). The most common variables include the availability of N in manure, the N uptake by a crop, and the N released by crop residues. Few countries explicitly consider N losses to ground and surface waters or to the atmosphere in the calculation methods. In some countries, the N fertilisation recommendation has a voluntary status, and in other countries, a legal one (caps on maximum allowable N rates). We compared the N fertiliser recommendations for a wheat crop grown on a farm with livestock, and for a farm with a diverse arable crop rotation without livestock. Across the 10 countries, large differences in the N fertilisation calculation methods and resulting N recommendations existed for the two management scenarios, ranging from almost no fertilisation to 135 kg N ha−1, and from 111 to 210 kg N ha−1, respectively. The differences were not accounted for by the complexity of the equations used, but rather resulted from contrasting reference values for N availability in manure, N uptake by crop and N leaching. However, the study concluded that standardisation of the method to calculate N fertilisation recommendations is likely to be counterproductive as there are no objective reasons to favour one method more than the others. Nonetheless, improvements in N use efficiency are necessary. Farm scale mass balance, combined with parameters such as minimum residual soil mineral N test at harvest, was suggested as being an important consideration.
AB - Nitrogen (N) budgets at farm level are influenced by N fertilisation recommendations. In this study, we reviewed and analysed the underlying principles and methods of N fertilisation recommendations in 10 West European countries, to identify similarities and differences, and develop suggestions for reconsideration and improvement. An analysis of national official documents on N fertilisation recommendations revealed that there were three main categories of calculation methods: (i) ‘N mass balances’ (France, Italy, Spain), (ii) ‘Corrected standards’ (Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, Luxembourg), and (iii) ‘Pre-parameterised calculations’, which rely on a soil N supply typology (United Kingdom, Ireland, Belgium). In total 16 variables were identified in the calculation methods. The more complex methods use 10 (Italy, France), while the simplest only rely on 3 (Luxembourg). The most common variables include the availability of N in manure, the N uptake by a crop, and the N released by crop residues. Few countries explicitly consider N losses to ground and surface waters or to the atmosphere in the calculation methods. In some countries, the N fertilisation recommendation has a voluntary status, and in other countries, a legal one (caps on maximum allowable N rates). We compared the N fertiliser recommendations for a wheat crop grown on a farm with livestock, and for a farm with a diverse arable crop rotation without livestock. Across the 10 countries, large differences in the N fertilisation calculation methods and resulting N recommendations existed for the two management scenarios, ranging from almost no fertilisation to 135 kg N ha−1, and from 111 to 210 kg N ha−1, respectively. The differences were not accounted for by the complexity of the equations used, but rather resulted from contrasting reference values for N availability in manure, N uptake by crop and N leaching. However, the study concluded that standardisation of the method to calculate N fertilisation recommendations is likely to be counterproductive as there are no objective reasons to favour one method more than the others. Nonetheless, improvements in N use efficiency are necessary. Farm scale mass balance, combined with parameters such as minimum residual soil mineral N test at harvest, was suggested as being an important consideration.
KW - advice
KW - fertiliser guide
KW - harmonisation
KW - innovative approaches
KW - mass balance
KW - nitrate
KW - regulation
U2 - 10.1111/ejss.13436
DO - 10.1111/ejss.13436
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85181206980
SN - 1351-0754
VL - 74
JO - European Journal of Soil Science
JF - European Journal of Soil Science
IS - 6
M1 - e13436
ER -