Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 May 31:12:657070.
doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.657070. eCollection 2021.

Nitrogen Use Efficiency, Allocation, and Remobilization in Apple Trees: Uptake Is Optimized With Pre-harvest N Supply

Affiliations

Nitrogen Use Efficiency, Allocation, and Remobilization in Apple Trees: Uptake Is Optimized With Pre-harvest N Supply

Bi Zheng Tan et al. Front Plant Sci. .

Abstract

Optimizing the utilization of applied nitrogen (N) in fruit trees requires N supply that is temporally matched to tree demand. We investigated how the timing of N application affected uptake, allocation, and remobilization within 14-year-old "Gala"/M26 apple trees (Malus domestica Borkh) over two seasons. In the 2017-2018 season, 30 g N tree-1 of 5.5 atom% 15N-calcium nitrate was applied by weekly fertigation in four equal doses, commencing either 4 weeks after full bloom (WAFB) (pre-harvest) or 1-week post-harvest, or fortnightly, divided between pre- and post-harvest (50:50 split). Nitrogen uptake derived from fertilizer (NDF) was monitored by leaf sampling before whole trees were destructively harvested at dormancy of the first season to quantify N uptake and allocation and at fruit harvest of the second season to quantify the remobilization of NDF. The uptake efficiency of applied N fertilizer (NUpE) was significantly higher from pre-harvest (32.0%) than from the other treatments (~17%). The leaf NDF concentration, an indicator of N uptake, increased concomitantly only when pre-harvest N was applied. Pre-harvest treated trees allocated more than half of the NDF into fruit and leaves and stored the same amount of NDF into perennial organs as the post-harvest treatment. Subsequent spring remobilization of NDF was not affected by the timing of N fertigation from the previous season. A seasonal effect of remobilization was observed with a decrease in root N status and a reciprocal increase in branch N status at fruit harvest of season two. These findings represent a shift in the understanding of dynamics of N use in mature deciduous trees and indicate that current fertilizer strategies need to be adjusted from post-harvest to primarily pre-harvest N application to optimize N use efficiency. This approach can provide adequate storage N to support early spring growth the following season with no detriment to fruit quality.

Keywords: 15N; application timing; nitrogen uptake; nitrogen use efficiency; partitioning (nitrogen); remobilization (nitrogen); storage (nitrogen).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Nitrogen uptake efficiency (NUpE) in the 2017–2018 season and nitrogen recovery efficiency (NRec) in the 2018–2019 season following different N application treatments. Different uppercase letters denote significant interaction (p < 0.05) between treatments and seasons and different lowercase letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) between treatments within a season (error bars represent ±SEM, n = 4).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Amount of nitrogen derived from fertilizer (NDF) and unlabeled N (Native N) for N-treated trees destructively harvested at the 2018 dormancy (excluding fruit and leaf foliage) and the 2019 harvest (including fruit and leaf) under different N fertigation treatments. Error bars represent ±SEM, n = 4.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Amount of nitrogen derived from fertilizer (NDF) and unlabeled N (Native N) of perennial storage organs excluding fruit and leaf for N-treated trees destructively harvested at the 2018 dormancy and the 2019 harvest under different N fertigation treatments. Error bars represent ±SEM, n = 4.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Dynamics of leaf N concentration [N] (A) and concentration of nitrogen derived from fertilizer (NDF) [NDF] (B) for N-treated trees during the 2017–2018 season following different N application timings. Error bars represent ±SEM, n = 4. Fruit was harvested at 22 WAFB.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Proportion (A) and total amount (B) of nitrogen derived from fertilizer (NDF) allocated into different organs for N-treated trees destructively harvested at dormancy of the 2017–2018 season under different N application treatments. Error bars represent ±SEM, n = 4. For each organ, notation indicating the extent of difference between treatments from unpaired two-sample t-test: ns p > 0.05; *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Total N in each organ showing composition of native N and nitrogen derived from fertilizer (NDF) at 1 week after fruit harvest of the 2018–2019 season under different N application treatments. Error bars represent ±SEM, n = 4.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Total N contained in the roots, trunk, branches, and seasonal canopy showing the composition of N derived from native N and nitrogen derived from fertilizer (NDF) at winter dormancy of 2017–2018 season and at 1 week after fruit harvest timing of the 2018–2019 season (March 2019). Error bars represent ±SEM, n = 12. For each organ, notation indicating the extent of difference related to the time of sampling from unpaired two-sample t-test: ns p > 0.05; *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.

References

    1. Aguirre P. B., Al-Hinai Y. K., Roper T. R., Krueger A. R. (2001). Apple tree rootstock and fertilizer application timing affect nitrogen uptake. HortScience 36, 1202–1205. 10.21273/HORTSCI.36.7.1202 - DOI
    1. Benincasa P., Guiducci M., Tei F. (2011). The nitrogen use efficiency: meaning and sources of variation—case studies on three vegetable crops in central Italy. HortTechnology 21, 266–273. 10.21273/HORTTECH.21.3.266 - DOI
    1. Blanpied G. D., Silsby K. J. (1992). Predicting harvest Date Windows for Apples. New York, NY: Cornell Cooperative Extension, 1–12.
    1. Carew R. (2000). A hedonic analysis of apple prices and product quality characteristics in British Columbia. Can. J. Agri. Econ. 48, 241–257. 10.1111/j.1744-7976.2000.tb00278.x - DOI
    1. Cassman K. G., Dobermann A., Walters D. T. (2002). Agroecosystems, nitrogen-use efficiency, and nitrogen management. J. Hum. Environ. 31, 132–140. 10.1579/0044-7447-31.2.132 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources