Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Plant Sci.

Sec. Plant Nutrition

Effects of nitrogen fertilizer rates on nutrient uptake, vertical nutrient distribution, and nitrogen balance in dryland spring wheat

Provisionally accepted
Aixia  XuAixia Xu1,2,3*Dr. Khuram  Shehzad KhanDr. Khuram Shehzad Khan1,2Yan  ZhangYan Zhang1,2Nana  LiuNana Liu1,2Pengbin  LiuPengbin Liu1,2Yafei  ChenYafei Chen1,2Xuexue  WeiXuexue Wei1,2Chongrui  SunChongrui Sun1,2ZECHARIAH  EFFAHZECHARIAH EFFAH4Lingling  LiLingling Li1,2*
  • 1State Key Laboratory of Aridland Crop Science, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou, China
  • 2College of Agronomy, Gansu Agricultural University, Lanzhou, China
  • 3National Demonstration Center for Experimental Plant Production Education (Gansu Agricultural University), Lanzhou, China
  • 4CSIR-Plant Genetic Resources Research Institute, Bunso, Ghana

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Optimizing nitrogen (N) fertilizer management is essential for sustainable crop production in semi-arid, rain-fed agricultural regions. This study evaluated the effects of different N-fertilizer rates on nutrient uptake, soil nutrient distribution, and N balance in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) under dryland conditions. The analysis was based on a long-term field experiment initiated 2003 in Dingxi, Gansu Province, China, with five N application rates: 0, 52.5, 105.0, 157.5, and 210.0 kg N ha−1 (designated as N1-N5). Study The study results showed that the concentrations and accumulations of N and K in wheat organs increased significantly with increasinghigher N rates.. However, both yield and nutrient uptake plateaued atfter the N application rate of 105 kg N ha−1 (N3) and , with no statistically significant benefits were observed atfrom higher Napplication rates.However, when the N-fertilizer rate exceeded 105 kg N ha−1 (N3), further increases in grain N and K accumulation and total plant N concentration were not significant. In contrast, increasing N fertilization significantly reducsuppressed grain P concentration, with the N5 treatment showing a 17.80% decreasereduction compared with N1. Soil nutrient responses exhibited clear vertical differentiation. Residual available N in the 0-100 cm soil layer increased significantly with increasing N rates, with a (32.20% increase underin N5 compared withvs. N1), whereasile available P decreased by 31.49%. Available K showed redistribution characteristics, with the surface layer and enrichment in the subsoil. Nitrogen balance analysis indicated that the apparent N-use efficiency decreased from 95.12% to 39.71% as N rates increased, while the apparent loss rate shifted from negative to positive values, reaching 33.79% underin N5. The N3 treatment achieved a near equilibrium N balance (8.69 kg ha−1), whereas the N5 treatment resultedexhibited in a substantial N surplus of 102.34 kg ha−1. Overall, an application rate ofUnder these conditions, applying 105 kg N ha−1 was identified as the optimal N -fertilizer rate for dryland spring wheat. This rate ensured adequatesufficient N uptake and grain yield, maintained high N use efficiency (NUE), minimized potential environmental risks, and achieved a balanced N supply-and demand relationship.

Keywords: N loss, N residual, N surplus, N use efficiency, nutrient uptake

Received: 12 Nov 2025; Accepted: 30 Jan 2026.

Copyright: © 2026 Xu, Khan, Zhang, Liu, Liu, Chen, Wei, Sun, EFFAH and Li. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence:
Aixia Xu
Lingling Li

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.