Next Article in Journal
The Impacts of Wind Shear on Spatial Variation of the Meteorological Element Field in the Atmospheric Convective Boundary Layer Based on Large Eddy Simulation
Next Article in Special Issue
One-Time Deep Application of Nitrogen Fertilizer: A Potential Measure of Ammonia Mitigation in Grainland
Previous Article in Journal
Molecule Simulation of CH4/CO2 Competitive Adsorption and CO2 Storage in Shale Montmorillonite
Previous Article in Special Issue
Satellite Support to Estimate Livestock Ammonia Emissions: A Case Study in Hebei, China
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

15N Natural Abundance Characteristics of Ammonia Volatilization from Soils Applied by Different Types of Fertilizer

1
State Key Laboratory of Soil and Sustainable Agriculture, Changshu National Agro-Ecosystem Observation and Research Station, Institute of Soil Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008, China
2
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
3
School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Anhui Normal University, Wuhu 241002, China
4
Co-Innovation Center for Sustainable Forestry in Southern China, Nanjing Forestry University, Nanjing 210037, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Atmosphere 2022, 13(10), 1566; https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13101566
Submission received: 4 September 2022 / Revised: 20 September 2022 / Accepted: 23 September 2022 / Published: 25 September 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Agricultural Ammonia Emission and Mitigation Effects)

Abstract

:
Ammonia (NH3) volatilized from cropland significantly impacts the ecological environment and human health. The identification and quantification of atmospheric sources of NH3 from cropland are therefore important for NH3 emission reduction and air pollution control. Choosing appropriate nitrogen (N) fertilizer types is one of the key ways to reduce NH3 emissions from agricultural systems due to different N fertilizers with different emission factors. The natural abundance isotope of N (δ15N) values can well identify the source of NH3 volatilization, although there is rare research on δ15N-NH3 values volatilized when applying different types of N fertilizers. Here, we conducted an incubation experiment to study the characteristics of δ15N-NH3 values during the whole volatilization process after different N fertilizers were applied to the soil. The results show that the cumulative NH3 volatilization from urea (U), urease inhibitor fertilizer (UI), compound fertilizer (CF) and ammonium nitrate phosphate fertilizer (AP) treatment was 5.25 ± 0.00, 3.11 ± 0.00, 3.22 ± 0.19 and 1.38 ± 0.12 kg N ha−1 at the end of the 15-day incubation period, respectively. The average δ15N value of NH3 volatilized from the U, UI, CF and AP treatments was −36.02 ± 4.95, −29.08 ± 9.70, −35.18 ± 4.98 and −29.42 ± 4.33‰, respectively. Generally, the δ15N-NH3 values ranged from −41.33 to −6.30‰ during the NH3 volatilization process. The δ15N-NH3 value was lower in the U treatment than in the UI and AP treatments (p < 0.05), which suggests that N forms and the slow-release additions of different fertilizers, such as NO3-N and urease inhibitors, can delay or slow down NH3 volatilization, resulting in relative isotopic enrichment. Therefore, the basic properties of different N fertilizers, the changes in soil NH4+-N and cumulative NH3 during the volatilization process significantly impacted the δ15N-NH3 values.

1. Introduction

Ammonia (NH3) is an important alkaline gas and one of the main reactive nitrogen (N) compounds in the atmosphere, and it plays a key role in atmospheric transport and the global N cycle [1,2]. However, excessive NH3 emission exerts negative influences on the ecological environment and human health, with effects such as soil acidification, water eutrophication and secondary particulate pollution [3,4,5,6,7,8]. NH3 emitted from fertilizer applications and livestock waste, accounting for approximately 90% of total NH3 emissions in China, has been recognized as a major source of atmospheric NH3 [9,10]. Globally, the total agricultural NH3 emissions from the use of synthetic N fertilizer were considerable, especially in China; the proportion reached approximately 34% [11]. However, the above estimations of the sources of contributions of NH3 emission from agriculture or cropland were focused on the “bottom-up” emission inventory methodology and model simulation method [12,13]. Bottom-up statistical methods require detailed spatiotemporal information on local agricultural practices and environmental conditions to ensure the accuracy of activity data and emission factors, and there are large uncertainties in using these methods because it is difficult to obtain real-time NH3 emission factors, activity data, etc. [10,14]. Moreover, the results of model simulations are difficult to verify due to the limitation of long-term observations of atmospheric NH3 and the uncertainty of atmospheric transport [10].
Therefore, complementary tools for accurately apportioning emissions sources that contribute to atmospheric NH3 are needed for NH3 pollution control. The natural abundance of N (15N/14N, expressed as δ15N), which can characterize the distinct δ15N signatures of each source [15,16,17,18], was used to trace the sources of atmospheric NH3. A previous study indicated that the δ15N-NH3 values between agricultural sources and non-agricultural sources were significantly different [19]. For example, Bhattarai et al. (2021) indicated that δ15N-NH3 emitted from fertilizer use (i.e., −28.3 ± 5.8‰) and livestock manure (i.e., −35.4 ± 11.5‰) was significantly lower than from fossil fuel (i.e., 0.7 ± 6.5‰) [18]. In addition, according to the relatively distinct isotope signature of NH3 emission sources, the contributions of different sources to sinks can be estimated by the isotope traceability model [18,20]. For instance, Ti et al. (2018) identified that the N deposition contribution from agricultural sources (volatilized fertilizer and animal excreta) was more than 60% through field observation data of δ15N-NH3 [21]. However, currently, there is insufficient research on the δ15N values of NH3 volatilization from different N fertilizers applied to soils [22]. Previous research has mainly focused on δ15N-NH3 values from urea application, lacking comparison with δ15N values of NH3 volatilized from other N fertilizers and the observations of δ15N-NH3 variation throughout the whole volatilization process [23,24,25].
A meta-analysis showed that the fertilizer source, the use of enhanced efficiency fertilizer and the field application method are the most effective for abating NH3 emissions effectively in the cropland system [26]. Different fertilizer types have different effects on reducing NH3 emission, which may cause the emitted NH3 to have different δ15N values. Hence, using a constant δ15N-NH3 value to represent different types of N fertilizers and the detailed volatilization processes may enlarge the uncertainties in atmospheric NH3 apportionment, and studies on δ15N-NH3 values of different N fertilizer applications are limited. Given the lack of isotopic signatures of detailed NH3 sources of different fertilizers, here, we hypothesized that (1) the δ15N-NH3 values of different N fertilizers are different due to the forms of N contained in fertilizers, and (2) soil properties have different effects on the δ15N-NH3 values of different fertilizers. The specific objectives of this study were to (1) clarify the characteristics of δ15N-NH3 during NH3 volatilization from different N fertilizer types applied to soils and to (2) explore the influencing factors of δ15N-NH3 values in the process of NH3 emission. Our findings can provide scientific support for the source apportionment and quantitative traceability of atmospheric NH3.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Soil Sample and N Fertilizer Types

This study was conducted on soils collected from 0–20 cm topsoil sampled from Changshu Agro-ecological Experimental Station (31°32′93″ N, 120°41′88″ E) in mid-November 2018. The soil was categorized as Gleyi-Stagnic Anthrosol (CRGCST 2001), developed from lacustrine sediments. All soil samples were air-dried and passed through a 2 mm sieve after removing visible plant roots and impurities. The basic soil properties analyzed before incubation are shown in Table 1.
Four types of N chemical fertilizers—urea (U) (N, 46.33%), urease inhibitor fertilizer (UI) (N, 46.62%), compound fertilizer (CF) (N: P2O5: K2O for 25: 15: 5) and ammonium nitrate phosphate fertilizer (AP) (N, 31.68%)—were selected in this study. The δ15N values of U, CF and AP were −3.6 ± 0.1, −3.0 ± 0.4 and −0.8 ± 0.7‰, respectively.

2.2. Measurements of NH3 Volatilization

The sponge-trapping method described by Ti et al. (2021) was used to measure NH3 volatilization of different fertilizer treatments in this study [27]. Briefly, NH3 volatilized from soils was absorbed in a sponge with the acid solution for staged cultivation. Each 100 g dry-weight soil was put into a 500 mL incubation bottle, adjusting soil moisture to 60% of water-filled pore space (WFPS) by adding deionized water. Four fertilizer treatments, (1) 63.36 mg U; (2) 63.36 mg UI; (3) 116.58 mg CF; and (4) 91.08 mg AP, equivalent to 180 kg N ha−1, were applied to the soil. A sponge with a diameter of 8.5 cm and a thickness of 1 cm was placed on the neck of the incubation bottle to absorb NH3 emissions from the soil. The sponge contained 4 mL of glycerol phosphate absorbent, sufficient for NH3 absorption volatilized from the soil in the experiment. The bottle cap was punched with a 1.4 cm diameter hole, and a 1.2 cm diameter rubber tube was inserted into the hole. A small sponge containing the above absorbent was inserted into the hole to prevent NH3 loss to air from the bottle (Figure 1). This experiment was designed for non-destructive sampling with three replicates to ensure experimental data accuracy. A total of 96 incubation bottles were then placed inside an incubator at a constant temperature of 25 ± 3 °C and a humidity of 95 ± 5%. The trapping sponges and incubated soils were sampled after 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 15 days. At each sampling interval, the removed trapping sponges were plunged into 50 mL of 1 mol L−1 KCl and were shaken for 2.5 h at 100 rotations per minute for NH4+-N sample extraction. The NH4+-N in the solution was analyzed using a continuous-flow analyzer, described below.

2.3. Physical and Chemical Soil Analysis

Concentrations of soil NH4+-N and NO3-N were extracted with 50 mL of 2 mol L−1 KCl, shaken for 1 h and determined by a continuous-flow analyzer (Skalar San++ System, Breda, Netherlands). The minimum detection limits for determining the NH4+-N and NO3-N concentrations were 0.046 and 0.015 mg N L−1. Several soil samples from each bottle were taken for air-drying. The laser diffraction method was used to determine the soil texture. The soil was passed through a 20-mesh sieve and was measured at a 1:2.5 (v/v) soil:water suspension using a glass electrode to achieve soil pH. The dry combustion method was used to determine the TN and TC concentrations using a Vario Max CN analyzer (Elementar, Vario Max CN, Hanau, Germany).

2.4. Nitrogen Isotopic Analysis

Values of δ15N were measured from sponge extracts. The δ15N-NHx values were analyzed using the method of Liu et al. (2014) [28]. In short, the method is based on the isotopic analysis of nitrous oxide (N2O). Based on the linear relationship between the δ15N of the substrate (NH4+) and the generated gas (N2O), a standard curve is established, and the substrate δ15N-NH4+ is deduced. Isotope ratio values are reported in parts per thousand relative to atmospheric N2 according to Equation (1).
δ 15 N - NH x ( ) = ( N 15 / 14 N ) sample - ( N 15 / 14 N ) standard   ( N 15 / 14 N ) standard × 1000
The N isotopic compositions of all samples were analyzed by an isotope mass spectrometer (Isoprime 100, Isoprime, Cheadle, UK). USGS25 (−30.4‰), USGS26 (+53.7‰) and IAEAN1 (+0.4‰) were selected as international reference δ15N-NH4+ standards for data correction. The typical analysis size was 4 mL and produced 60 nmol of N2O with a δ15N standard deviation less than 0.3‰ and often less than 0.1‰, based on six replicates.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

The data obtained in these experiments were sorted by Excel 2016. The analysis of variance was calculated by SPSS ver. 22.0 (IBM Corp., Chicago, IL, USA). The significant difference in cumulative NH3 volatilization, NH4+-N and NO3-N in soil among different treatments were tested using a one-way ANOVA and LSD (Least Significant Difference) methods. The correlogram of impact factors was drawn using R software. Within the text, all values are reported as mean ± SD, and significance is defined as p < 0.05.

3. Results

3.1. NH3 Volatilization of Different Fertilizers

Cumulative NH3 volatilization varied significantly with different types of N fertilizers at the 180 kg N ha−1 level over time (Figure 2). Daily NH3-N volatilization of U and CF treatments peaked on day 2 after fertilizer application, whereas UI and AP treatments were delayed to day 4 and day 7, respectively. NH3-N volatilization from the AP treatment varied little and remained low throughout the incubation period, whereas cumulative NH3 volatilization increased rapidly in the U treatment. The cumulative NH3 losses from the UI and CF treatments were at the medium level compared with the U and AP treatments, and NH3-N volatilization from the CF treatment increased faster than from the UI treatment at the initial stage (day 1 to day 3). The cumulative NH3 volatilization from the U, UI, CF and AP treatments was 5.25 ± 0.00, 3.11 ± 0.00, 3.22 ± 0.19 and 1.38 ± 0.12 kg N ha−1 at the end of the 15-day incubation period, respectively. There were significant differences in cumulative NH3 volatilization in soils with different N fertilizers applied in all the treatments (p < 0.05).

3.2. δ15N Values of NH3 Volatilized from Soils

The δ15N values of NH3 volatilized from soils with different N fertilizers applied changed with time during the whole incubation period. They decreased from day 1 to day 4 and then increased after day 4 (Figure 3). Across the incubation period, the δ15N values of U, UI, CF and AP treatment ranged from −41.33 to −26.99‰, −36.57 to −6.30‰, −40.73 to −27.69‰ and −33.78 to −21.77‰, with an average of −36.02 ± 4.95, −29.08 ± 9.70, −35.18 ± 4.98 and −29.42 ± 4.33‰, respectively. The δ15N values of NH3 volatilized from the U treatment were significantly lower than those from the UI and AP treatments during the 15-day incubation (p < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences between other treatments.

3.3. Variation in Soil Properties

Different N fertilizer applications created different variations in soil properties during the 15-day incubation period. Soil NH4+-N concentrations increased rapidly throughout the experiment and then decreased for all treatments (Figure 4a). Soil NH4+-N concentrations in the U, CF and AP treatments peaked on day 2 after N application, whereas those in the UI treatment peaked on day 4 (131.79 ± 3.61 mg N kg−1). On day 15, the soil NH4+-N concentrations in the U, UI, CF and AP treatments, tending to the soil background value, were 10.00 ± 1.34, 9.59 ± 2.65, 5.56 ± 0.94 and 8.46 ± 0.81 mg N kg−1, respectively. Soil NH4+-N concentrations in the U treatment were much higher than those in the AP treatment (p < 0.05), and there were no significant differences between the CF and UI treatments across the whole incubation period.
Soil NO3-N concentrations increased continuously after N fertilizer applications over time (Figure 4b). Soil NO3-N concentrations increased steadily in the U, UI and CF treatments, and the soil NO3-N levels in the AP treatment increased sharply to 132.94 ± 0.96 mg N kg−1 and then increased relatively slowly. On day 15, soil NO3-N concentrations in the U, UI, CF and AP treatments were 216.99 ± 15.88, 226.61 ± 6.84, 193.91 ± 1.92 and 233.21 ± 3.14 mg N kg−1, respectively. Soil NO3--N concentrations in the AP treatment were significantly higher than those in the other treatments (p < 0.05).
Soil pH had very similar variation trends to soil NH4+-N concentrations (Figure 4c). Soil pH peaked at 7.20 ± 0.02 in the AP treatment on day 1 after N fertilizer application and reached the greatest values at 7.83 ± 0.02 and 7.53 ± 0.05 on day 2 in the U and CF treatments, respectively, whereas the UI treatment peaked on day 4 (7.69 ± 0.04). At the end of the experiment, soil pH in the U, UI, CF and AP treatments was 6.56 ± 0.08, 6.37 ± 0.04, 6.62 ± 0.02 and 6.65 ± 0.01, respectively. Soil pH in the U treatment was significantly different from that in the AP treatment (p < 0.05), with no significant differences between the other treatments.

3.4. Relationship between δ15N-NH3 and Soil Properties

Throughout all treatments, δ15N-NH3 was negatively correlated with soil NH4+-N and cumulative NH3 volatilization (Figure 5). The soil NH4+-N concentration was positively correlated with the daily NH3 volatilization, and the soil pH was positively correlated with the soil NH4+-N concentration. Moreover, the daily NH3 volatilization negatively correlated with soil NO3-N concentrations.

4. Discussion

4.1. Characteristics of δ15N-NH3 Volatilized from Different Fertilizers

It is possible to identify and quantify the contributions of soil NH3 to atmospheric NH3 according to the distinct δ15N signature [21,29]. Therefore, determining the detailed δ15N values of NH3 volatilized from different N fertilizer applications to soils is needed to support accurate traceability data. The results observed in this study indicate that the δ15N values of NH3 varied differently due to different types of N fertilizers applied to the soil. Although our findings were within the range of previous studies from −52.0‰ to −0.3‰, similar δ15N-NH3 values were obtained with different types of N fertilizers [21,23,24,25,30,31]. For example, δ15N-NH3 volatilized from urea was similar to the study of Wells et al. (2015) [23], but the N application rate was largely different. This is because the soils (Templeton Silt Loam) in the study of Wells et al. (2015) [23] have better aeration than the soils (Gleyi-Stagnic Anthrosol) in this study, which more easily emit NH3 [32]. In addition, other research on δ15N-NH3 volatilized from urea is quite different from this study due to the different research sites outside the laboratory with different N application rates [24,30].
According to previous studies, most of the observed δ15N-NH3 values were based on field monitoring of the urea application, and research on other types of N fertilizers is lacking (Figure 6). A notable finding in this study was that δ15N-NH3 values in the U treatment were significantly lower than those in the UI and AP treatments, which were distinctly different from previous research on δ15N-NH3 volatilized from soils with urea applied, as shown in Figure 6. Moreover, the sampling time caused changes in δ15N-NH3 values during the whole incubation process in this study. Similarly, prior researchers have reported a large variation in δ15N-NH3 values during the volatilization process [23,25,27].

4.2. Impacts of Fertilizer Types on δ15N-NH3

A large amount of NH3 is produced due to rapid urea hydrolysis by soil ureases (CO(NH2)2 + 3H2O –> CO2 + 2NH3 + 2H2O) [33]. The high soil pH and NH4+ availability increase NH3 volatilization rates, thus causing a decrease in δ15N-NH3 values [27]. In this study, we found that soil pH and NH4+ concentrations were dominant factors controlling NH3 volatilization, which negatively correlated with δ15N-NH3 values. In addition, AP is produced by melting and granulating ammonium nitrate and monoammonium phosphate, a binary compound fertilizer containing NO3N, NH4+-N and P [34]. Thus, the containing of NO3N could result in lower soil NH4+-N and soil pH levels in the AP treatment than in the other three treatments, thereby leading to the lowest NH3 volatilization and highest δ15N-NH3 values in the four treatments. These results indicate that an increase in NO3 in N applications can reduce NH3 volatilization, thereby increasing the values of δ15N-NH3.
Due to the addition of a urease inhibitor, the peak and amount of NH3 volatilization was distinctly delayed or reduced for the UI treatment compared with the U treatment, and it was reduced by approximately 41% at the end of the experiment. These results are similar to those reported by Mariano et al. (2019) [35] and Silva et al. (2017) [32], in that cumulative NH3 losses were reduced by around 50% relative to urea. The application of a urease inhibitor temporarily inhibits urease activity during urea hydrolysis [36], resulting in the prevention of a sudden increase in soil pH and avoiding the dominance of NH3-N over NH4+-N in the soil [37]. Therefore, the soil pH of the UI treatment remained almost unchanged in the first four days, and NH4+-N accumulated in the soil. As a result, NH3 volatilization in the UI treatment was lower than in the U treatment, and δ15N-NH3 values were higher. These results indicate that applying a urease inhibitor can reduce NH3 volatilization and subsequently increase δ15N-NH3 to some extent. Moreover, CF used in this study was made of urea, ammonium phosphate and potassium chloride as the main raw materials. The part of N in CF existed in the form of urea, so cumulative NH3 volatilization had similar trends with the U treatment in the first three days. Thereafter, NH3 volatilization was dominated by ammonium phosphate (another form of N in the CF treatment), and NH3 volatilization was minimal [38], resulting in δ15N-NH3 values in the CF treatment characterized between the U and AP treatments. In conclusion, urease inhibition and increased NO3-N can lead to a high value of δ15N-NH3.
In general, cumulative NH3 volatilization and soil NH4+-N concentrations made a direct impact on the δ15N-NH3 emitted from N fertilizers applied to soils, whereas soil pH, soil NO3-N concentrations and daily NH3 volatilization affected δ15N-NH3 indirectly. For example, the soil pH not only defines the intensity of microbiological reactions but also affects the NH3 volatilization rate; it has been proved that this process is intensified under an alkaline soil pH [39,40]. With the growth of soil pH, soil NH4+-N concentrations increased, which facilitated the diffusion of NH3 into the air, leading to a decrease in isotope values. Thus, soil pH affected δ15N-NH3 indirectly in this study, and Wu et al. (2018) [41] demonstrated the negative effect of soil pH on δ15N-NH3. Therefore, the δ15N-NH3 volatilized from soils with different N fertilizers applied exhibited different patterns under various influencing factors.
Furthermore, changes in NHx species during NH3 volatilization influenced by microbiological and physicochemical processes cause isotope fractionation effects, and the reaction product is enriched or depleted relative to the substrate [15,16]. Several studies have reported that the isotope composition of 15N during NH3 volatilization varies due to isotope fractionation [42]. 14N-containing molecules react faster than those containing 15N, usually, because more energy is needed to break or form chemical bonds involving 15N than 14N [16,43,44]. NH3 volatilization can strongly fractionate N isotopes ranging from 40‰ to 60‰ [16]. Thus, the isotope composition of NH3 volatilization varied over time, decreasing first and then increasing. Furthermore, other factors such as soil moisture and temperatures can affect NH3 volatilization and δ15N-NH3. For example, Ti et al. (2018) [21] reported that, as the temperature increased in the field, the δ15N-NH3 values decreased. In summary, the different types of N fertilizers, variations in soil NH4+-N and cumulative NH3 during the volatilization process significantly affected δ15N-NH3 values.

4.3. Application and Limitation of δ15N-NH3

The distinct signature of the δ15N values of NH3 volatilized from different emission sources has been successfully used to explore N sources, transformations, and fates in different scenarios [16,19,22]. For example, δ15N-NH3 values in agricultural sources are significantly lower than in fossil fuel sources [19]. Moreover, δ15N-NH3 values volatilized from soils are significantly lower than those of the background values of soils and N fertilizers because of the fractionation effect. Thus, the δ15N-NH3 value can be an important tool to clarify the source of NH3 in the atmosphere and can provide accurate data supporting the scientific and efficient fertilization of farmland and atmospheric haze control. In addition, the δ15N-NHx value can provide new research prospects for tracing atmospheric reactive N, such as the N deposition process, contributing to a better understanding of the N cycle in the ecosystem [19,21].
However, our study was conducted in incubation conditions. The δ15N values of NH3 emitted from soils could be influenced by other factors, such as temperature, wind speed, moisture and land-use types [45]. NH3 emitted from soils depends on multiple factors, such as soil properties, meteorological conditions and agricultural management, which may affect the δ15N-NH3 values directly or indirectly [45,46]. The differences in chemical composition and production processes of different N fertilizers caused differences in soil properties and NH3 volatilization after application to the soil, which in turn affected the differences in δ15N-NH3 values. The use of δ15N as a tracer to quantify the sources and N cycling is still very difficult. Therefore, more detailed δ15N-NH3 values in field conditions need to be quantified to improve the accuracy of atmospheric NH3 traceability.

5. Conclusions

This study investigated variations in δ15N values of NH3 volatilized from four types of N fertilizers applied to soils during a 15-day incubation process for the first time. Our observations show that the average δ15N-NH3 volatilized from the U, UI, CF and AP treatments was −36.02 ± 4.95, −29.08 ± 9.70, −35.18 ± 4.98 and −29.42 ± 4.33‰, respectively. Our results conclude that urease inhibition and increased NO3-N could lead to a high value of δ15N-NH3. Furthermore, cumulative NH3 volatilization and soil NH4+-N concentration were significantly correlated with δ15N-NH3 values. Our results may ultimately help to improve the accuracy of atmospheric NH3 traceability and enhance understanding of the N cycle. However, more mechanisms driving changes in δ15N-NH3 need to be explored in the future.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.T. and X.Y.; Data curation, L.P., L.T., X.W., R.W. and Y.T.; Formal analysis, L.P.; Methodology, S.M., L.W. and C.T.; Supervision, X.Y.; Writing—original draft preparation, L.P.; Writing—review and editing, L.P., C.T. and X.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (41961124004, 42177313, and 42061124001).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in article.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Henan Xin Lian Xin Fertilizer Co., Ltd., and Aboluo Agriculture Ecological Science & Technology Group Co., Ltd., that provided the fertilizers for our experiments.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Galloway, J.N.; Townsend, A.R.; Erisman, J.W.; Bekunda, M.; Cai, Z.; Freney, J.R.; Martinelli, L.A.; Seitzinger, S.P.; Sutton, M.A. Transformation of the Nitrogen Cycle: Recent Trends, Questions, and Potential Solutions. Science 2008, 320, 889–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Fowler, D.; Coyle, M.; Skiba, U.; Sutton, M.A.; Cape, J.N.; Reis, S.; Sheppard, L.J.; Jenkins, A.; Grizzetti, B.; Galloway, J.N.; et al. The global nitrogen cycle in the twenty-first century. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 2013, 368, 20130164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Kirkby, J.; Curtius, J.; Almeida, J.; Dunne, E.; Duplissy, J.; Ehrhart, S.; Franchin, A.; Gagne, S.; Ickes, L.; Kurten, A.; et al. Role of sulphuric acid, ammonia and galactic cosmic rays in atmospheric aerosol nucleation. Nature 2011, 476, 429–433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Yang, F.; Tan, J.; Zhao, Q.; Du, Z.; He, K.; Ma, Y.; Duan, F.; Chen, G.; Zhao, Q. Characteristics of PM2.5 speciation in representative megacities and across China. Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. 2011, 11, 1025–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zhan, X.; Bo, Y.; Zhou, F.; Liu, X.; Paerl, H.W.; Shen, J.; Wang, R.; Li, F.; Tao, S.; Dong, Y.; et al. Evidence for the Importance of Atmospheric Nitrogen Deposition to Eutrophic Lake Dianchi, China. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2017, 51, 6699–6708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Dentener, F.; Drevet, J.; Lamarque, J.F.; Bey, I.; Eickhout, B.; Fiore, A.M.; Hauglustaine, D.; Horowitz, L.W.; Krol, M.; Kulshrestha, U.C.; et al. Nitrogen and sulfur deposition on regional and global scales: A multimodel evaluation. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 2006, 20, GB4003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gu, B.; Zhang, L.; Dingenen, R.V.; Vieno, M.; Grinsven, H.J.V.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, S.; Chen, Y.; Wang, S.; Ren, C.; et al. Abating ammonia is more cost-effective than nitrogen oxides for mitigating PM2.5 air pollution. Science 2021, 374, 758–762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Babar, Z.B.; Park, J.-H.; Lim, H.-J. Influence of NH3 on secondary organic aerosols from the ozonolysis and photooxidation of α-pinene in a flow reactor. Atmos. Environ. 2017, 164, 71–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kang, Y.; Liu, M.; Song, Y.; Huang, X.; Yao, H.; Cai, X.; Zhang, H.; Kang, L.; Liu, X.; Yan, X.; et al. High-resolution ammonia emissions inventories in China from 1980 to 2012. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2016, 16, 2043–2058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Zhang, L.; Chen, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Henze, D.K.; Zhu, L.; Song, Y.; Paulot, F.; Liu, X.; Pan, Y.; Lin, Y.; et al. Agricultural ammonia emissions in China: Reconciling bottom-up and top-down estimates. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2018, 18, 339–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Ma, R.; Zou, J.; Han, Z.; Yu, K.; Wu, S.; Li, Z.; Liu, S.; Niu, S.; Horwath, W.R.; Zhu-Barker, X. Global soil-derived ammonia emissions from agricultural nitrogen fertilizer application: A refinement based on regional and crop-specific emission factors. Glob. Chang. Biol. 2021, 27, 855–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Zhang, Y.; Luan, S.; Chen, L.; Shao, M. Estimating the volatilization of ammonia from synthetic nitrogenous fertilizers used in China. J. Environ. Manag. 2011, 92, 480–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Sutton, M.A.; Reis, S.; Riddick, S.N.; Dragosits, U.; Nemitz, E.; Theobald, M.R.; Sim Tang, Y.; Braban, C.F.; Vieno, M.; Dore, A.J.; et al. Towards a climate-dependent paradigm of ammonia emission and deposition. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B-Biol. Sci. 2013, 368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Bouwman, A.F.; Boumans, L.J.M.; Batjes, N.H. Estimation of global NH3volatilization loss from synthetic fertilizers and animal manure applied to arable lands and grasslands. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 2002, 16, 8-1–8-14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Nikolenko, O.; Jurado, A.; Borges, A.V.; Knller, K.; Brouyre, S. Isotopic composition of nitrogen species in groundwater under agricultural areas: A review. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 621, 1415–1432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Robinson, D. δ15N as an integrator of the nitrogen cycle. Trends Ecol. Evolut. 2001, 16, 153–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Choi, W.-J.; Lee, S.-M.; Ro, H.-M. Evaluation of contamination sources of groundwater NO3 using nitrogen isotope data: A review. Geosci. J. 2003, 7, 81–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bhattarai, N.; Wang, S.; Pan, Y.; Xu, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Chang, Y.; Fang, Y. delta(15)N-stable isotope analysis of NH x: An overview on analytical measurements, source sampling and its source apportionment. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 2021, 15, 126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Elliott, E.M.; Yu, Z.; Cole, A.S.; Coughlin, J.G. Isotopic advances in understanding reactive nitrogen deposition and atmospheric processing. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 662, 393–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Zeng, Y.; Tian, S.; Pan, Y. Revealing the Sources of Atmospheric Ammonia: A Review. Curr. Pollut. Rep. 2018, 4, 189–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ti, C.; Gao, B.; Luo, Y.; Wang, X.; Wang, S.; Yan, X. Isotopic characterization of NHx-N in deposition and major emission sources. Biogeochemistry 2018, 138, 85–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Chalk, P.M.; Inácio, C.T.; Chen, D. An overview of contemporary advances in the usage of 15N natural abundance (δ15N) as a tracer of agro-ecosystem N cycle processes that impact the environment. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2019, 283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wells, N.S.; Baisden, W.T.; Clough, T.J. Ammonia volatilisation is not the dominant factor in determining the soil nitrate isotopic composition of pasture systems. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2015, 199, 290–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Chang, Y.; Liu, X.; Deng, C.; Dore, A.J.; Zhuang, G. Source apportionment of atmospheric ammonia before, during, and after the 2014 APEC summit in Beijing using stable nitrogen isotope signatures. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 2016, 16, 11635–11647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Frank, D.A.; Evans, R.D.; Tracy, B.F. The role of ammonia volatilization in controlling the natural 15N abundance of a grazed grassland. Biogeochemistry 2004, 68, 169–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Ti, C.; Xia, L.; Chang, S.X.; Yan, X. Potential for mitigating global agricultural ammonia emission: A meta-analysis. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 245, 141–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ti, C.; Ma, S.; Peng, L.; Tao, L.; Wang, X.; Dong, W.; Wang, L.; Yan, X. Changes of delta(15)N values during the volatilization process after applying urea on soil. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 270, 116204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Liu, D.; Fang, Y.; Tu, Y.; Pan, Y. Chemical method for nitrogen isotopic analysis of ammonium at natural abundance. Anal. Chem. 2014, 86, 3787–3792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Berner, A.H.; David Felix, J. Investigating ammonia emissions in a coastal urban airshed using stable isotope techniques. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 707, 134952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Felix, J.D.; Elliott, E.M.; Gish, T.J.; McConnell, L.L.; Shaw, S.L. Characterizing the isotopic composition of atmospheric ammonia emission sources using passive samplers and a combined oxidation-bacterial denitrifier approach. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 2013, 27, 2239–2246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Savard, M.M.; Cole, A.; Smirnoff, A.; Vet, R. δ15 N values of atmospheric N species simultaneously collected using sector-based samplers distant from sources—Isotopic inheritance and fractionation. Atmos. Environ. 2017, 162, 11–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Silva, A.G.B.; Sequeira, C.H.; Sermarini, R.A.; Otto, R. Urease Inhibitor NBPT on Ammonia Volatilization and Crop Productivity: A Meta-Analysis. Agron. J. 2017, 109, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Choi, W.-J.; Kwak, J.-H.; Lim, S.-S.; Park, H.-J.; Chang, S.X.; Lee, S.-M.; Arshad, M.A.; Yun, S.-I.; Kim, H.-Y. Synthetic fertilizer and livestock manure differently affect δ15N in the agricultural landscape: A review. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2017, 237, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Bhujbal, B.M.; Mistry, K.B. Reaction products of ammonium nitrate phosphate fertilizers of varying water-soluble phosphorus content in different Indian soils. Fertil. Res. 1986, 10, 59–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Mariano, E.; de Sant Ana Filho, C.R.; Bortoletto-Santos, R.; Bendassolli, J.A.; Trivelin, P.C.O. Ammonia losses following surface application of enhanced-efficiency nitrogen fertilizers and urea. Atmos. Environ. 2019, 203, 242–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Chien, S.H.; Prochnow, L.I.; Cantarella, H. Chapter 8 Recent Developments of Fertilizer Production and Use to Improve Nutrient Efficiency and Minimize Environmental Impacts. Adv. Agron. 2009, 102, 267–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Christianson, C.B.; Baethgen, W.E.; Carmona, G.; Howard, R.G. Microsite reactions of urea-nbtpt fertilizer on the soil surface. Soil Biol. Biochem. 1993, 25, 1107–1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Larsen, S.; Gunary, D. Ammonia loss from ammoniacal fertilisers applied to calcareous soils. J. Sci. Food Agric. 1962, 13, 566–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Kissel, D.E.; Cabrera, M.L.; Paramasivam, S. Ammonium, ammonia, and urea reactions in soils. In Nitrogen in Agricultural Systems; Schepers, J.S., Raun, W., Eds.; Agronomy Monograph: Madison, WI, USA, 2008; Volume 49, pp. 101–155. [Google Scholar]
  40. Witter, E.; Lopez-Real, J. Nitrogen Losses During the Composting of Sewage Sludge, and the Effectiveness of Clay Soil, Zeolite, and Compost in Adsorbing the Volatilized Ammonia. Biol. Wastes 1988, 23, 279–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wu, Y.; Wang, B.; Chen, D. Regional-scale patterns of δ13C and δ15N associated with multiple ecosystem functions along an aridity gradient in grassland ecosystems. Plant Soil 2018, 432, 107–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Högberg, P. Tansley Review No. 95-15N natural abundance in soil-plant systems. New Phytol. 1997, 137, 179–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Heaton, T.H.E. Isotopic studies of nitrogen pollution in the hydrosphere and atmosphere: A review. Chem. Geol. 1986, 59, 87–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Choi, W.J.; Arshad, M.A.; Chang, S.X.; Kim, T.H. Grain 15N of crops applied with organic and chemical fertilizers in a four-year rotation. Plant Soil 2006, 284, 165–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Sommer, S.G.; Schjoerring, J.K.; Denmead, O.T. Ammonia Emission from Mineral Fertilizers and Fertilized Crops. Adv. Agron. 2004, 82, 557–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Pan, B.; Lam, S.K.; Mosier, A.; Luo, Y.; Chen, D. Ammonia volatilization from synthetic fertilizers and its mitigation strategies: A global synthesis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2016, 232, 283–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. The schematic diagram of the incubation for the measurement of NH3 volatilization from soil in this study.
Figure 1. The schematic diagram of the incubation for the measurement of NH3 volatilization from soil in this study.
Atmosphere 13 01566 g001
Figure 2. Cumulative NH3 volatilization after different N fertilizer applications to soils during 15-day incubation (all values are mean ± SD).
Figure 2. Cumulative NH3 volatilization after different N fertilizer applications to soils during 15-day incubation (all values are mean ± SD).
Atmosphere 13 01566 g002
Figure 3. The δ15N values of NH3 volatilized after different N fertilizers were applied to soils during 15-day incubation (all values are mean ± SD).
Figure 3. The δ15N values of NH3 volatilized after different N fertilizers were applied to soils during 15-day incubation (all values are mean ± SD).
Atmosphere 13 01566 g003
Figure 4. Changes in soil NH4+-N concentrations (a), soil NO3-N concentrations (b) and soil pH (1:2.5 soil:water) (c) after different N fertilizer applications to soils during the whole incubation process. Symbols and error bars denote mean ± SD.
Figure 4. Changes in soil NH4+-N concentrations (a), soil NO3-N concentrations (b) and soil pH (1:2.5 soil:water) (c) after different N fertilizer applications to soils during the whole incubation process. Symbols and error bars denote mean ± SD.
Atmosphere 13 01566 g004
Figure 5. Visualized correlation matrix of NH3-volatilization-related properties using correlogram drawing by R software (* and ** were defined as p < 0.05 and p < 0.01).
Figure 5. Visualized correlation matrix of NH3-volatilization-related properties using correlogram drawing by R software (* and ** were defined as p < 0.05 and p < 0.01).
Atmosphere 13 01566 g005
Figure 6. δ15N-NH3 values by emission source from N fertilizers compared with other research.
Figure 6. δ15N-NH3 values by emission source from N fertilizers compared with other research.
Atmosphere 13 01566 g006
Table 1. Basic soil properties.
Table 1. Basic soil properties.
pHTotal N (g/kg)SOC (g/kg)NH4+-N (mg/kg)NO3-N (mg/kg)Clay (%)Silt (%)Sand (%)δ15N-NH4+ (‰)
Average7.090.272.993.556.1031.7058.409.90−3.4
SD *0.030.020.150.050.270.71.11.70.1
* SD: standard deviation of each soil property.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Peng, L.; Tao, L.; Ma, S.; Wang, X.; Wang, R.; Tu, Y.; Wang, L.; Ti, C.; Yan, X. 15N Natural Abundance Characteristics of Ammonia Volatilization from Soils Applied by Different Types of Fertilizer. Atmosphere 2022, 13, 1566. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13101566

AMA Style

Peng L, Tao L, Ma S, Wang X, Wang R, Tu Y, Wang L, Ti C, Yan X. 15N Natural Abundance Characteristics of Ammonia Volatilization from Soils Applied by Different Types of Fertilizer. Atmosphere. 2022; 13(10):1566. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13101566

Chicago/Turabian Style

Peng, Lingyun, Limin Tao, Shutan Ma, Xi Wang, Ruhai Wang, Yonghui Tu, Liangjie Wang, Chaopu Ti, and Xiaoyuan Yan. 2022. "15N Natural Abundance Characteristics of Ammonia Volatilization from Soils Applied by Different Types of Fertilizer" Atmosphere 13, no. 10: 1566. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13101566

APA Style

Peng, L., Tao, L., Ma, S., Wang, X., Wang, R., Tu, Y., Wang, L., Ti, C., & Yan, X. (2022). 15N Natural Abundance Characteristics of Ammonia Volatilization from Soils Applied by Different Types of Fertilizer. Atmosphere, 13(10), 1566. https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos13101566

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop