Soil & Tillage Research 144 (2014) 133–140

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Soil & Tillage Research

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/still

A lysimeters study of Chinese wheat and maize varieties: I. The

lysimeters-rain shelter facility and the growth and water use of wheat
Limin Gu a , Peng Liu a, * , Lijie Shao a , Jingfeng Wang a , Shuting Dong a, * ,
Bingqiang Zhao b , Hwat-Bing So c , Wenyan Sun b , Jiwang Zhang a , Bin Zhao a
a
State Key Laboratory of Crop Biology, Shandong Agricultural University, Tai'an 271018, Shandong Province,PR China
b
Institute of Agricultural Resources and Regional Planning, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS), Beijing 100081, PR China
c
Environmental Futures Center, Griffith University, Nathan, QLD 4111, Australia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history: Excessive application of N fertilizer contributes substantially to high levels of nitrate (NO

3 –N) in surface
Received 22 November 2013 and groundwater on Northern China. A trial was set up to quantify the fate of N within intensive wheat
Received in revised form 15 June 2014 maize rotation system with a view to improve N and water use efficiencies. This paper describes the
Accepted 17 June 2014
construction and testing of a lysimeter facility used for this trial. A 44 lysimeter/rain shelter facility was
constructed at Shandong Agricultural University (SDAU). Each lysimeter was equipped with a neutron
Keywords: access tube for soil water monitoring and ceramic solution samplers for soil solutions collection. In order
Lysimeter
to precisely quantify water input, two rain shelters were used to exclude rainwater. The water balance
Rain shelter
Water use
showed that water outputs and inputs agree within 10% for all lysimeters, and that the average water
Soil solution samplers used being 5% less than the total irrigation water supplied was considered as an acceptable error for such
Wheat yield large lysimeters. Wheat grown in these devices was consistently higher than those grown with similar
fertilizer management in a field located in Ling Xian due to enhanced soil fertility and irrigation in the
devices. The facility was shown to be suitable for investigating water and nutrient balances of the root
zone.
ã 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
The Huang Huai-Hai Plains (HHP) or the lower reaches of the
Yellow River Plains is a typical of the northern part of China, where
winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays
L.) cropping system is commonly practiced. This area produces
over 30% of the national grain, which supports a population of 1.2
billion people. Chinese agriculture has intensified greatly since the
early 1980s through large inputs of chemical fertilizers and other
resources on a limited area of land. National consumption of grain
and nitrogen (N) fertilizer reached 502  106 t and 32.6  106 t,
respectively, in 2007. These amounts represent increases of 54%
and 191%, respectively, over consumption levels in 1981 (China
Agriculture Yearbook, 1982–2008). The annual application rate of
mineral N for conventional agricultural practices in Eastern China,
Abbreviations: SDAU, Shandong Agricultural University; HHP, Huang Huai-Hai
Plains; NUE, nitrogen use efficiencies; AV, ammonia volatilization; CSC, ceramic
suction cup; GY, grain yield; DM, dry matter; SM15, Shimai15; JM19, Jimai 19.
* Corresponding author at: Postal address No. 61 Daizong street, Taishan District,
Tai'an City, Shandong Province 271018, PR China. Tel.: +86 538 8245838;
fax: +86 538 8245838.
E-mail addresses: liup@sdau.edu.cn (P. Liu), stdong@sdau.edu.cn (S. Dong).
Southeastern China, and HHP are now in the range of 550–600 kg
N ha
1 in typical double-cropping systems (Zhao et al., 2006; Zhu
and Chen, 2002).
N quantities applied on the HHP are very high (Ju et al., 2009) in
comparison with those used in North America and Europe (Chopra,
2005), which have degraded soils and reduced environmental
quality of HHP. Excessive application of N fertilizer contributes
substantially to regional soil acidification in the country (Ju et al.,
2009; Matsuyama et al., 2005). Zhao et al. (2005) and Ye et al.
(2010) demonstrated that the N use efficiencies (NUE) are poor and
in the range of 22–41%. Clearly, these rates are too low and raise
questions about the fate of the remaining 59–78% of N applied to
the soil.
Widespread high levels of nitrate (NO
3 –N) in surface and
groundwater in agricultural areas are of growing concern (Angle
et al., 1993; Gärdenäs et al., 2005; Mailhol et al., 2001; Waddell and
Weil, 2006). A limit of NO
3 –N concentration has been set by some
organizations (Council Directive, 1998; Fedkiw, 1991; Martin et al.,
1994; Tyson et al., 1992; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
1981). When the NO
3 –N concentration exceeds 10 mg L

1
in
drinking water, it may pose risks for young animals and human
babies (Fedkiw, 1991; Tyson et al., 1992; Martin et al., 1994). The
World Health Organization and the European Community

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2014.06.005
0167-1987/ ã 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
134 L. Gu et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 144 (2014) 133–140
recommended that NO
3 –N level should be less than 11.3 mg L

1
in
potable water (Council Directive, 1998).
The excessively high rates of inorganic fertilizer used in China
have resulted in elevated level of NO
3 –N in groundwater,
especially on the HHP (Cui, 2000; Hu et al., 2005; Liu et al.,
2005). Zhang et al. (1996) reported that among 69 wells surveyed
across 14 counties on the HHP, over 50% had NO
3 –N concen-
trations of more than 10 mg NO

1
3 –N L . There is a need to improve
fertilization practices, especially in irrigated areas, aiming to
reduce the amount of N entering the groundwater systems (Bar-
Yosef, 1999; Gärdenäs et al., 2005; Jones and Olson-Rutz, 2011).
To develop improved agronomic practices used in the current
HHP wheat-maize rotation system, we urgently need to quantify
the N balance and the rates of N losses including deep leaching and
volatilization in this system. Appropriate experiments may be
conducted in the field, in laboratory soil columns or in lysimeters.
Field-based investigations are resource-intensive and measuring
all components of the N balance is difficult. Many studies have
examined solute transport through repacked laboratory soil
columns (Beeson, 2011; De Rooij and Stagnitti, 2002; Karapanagioti
et al., 2004; Krzyszowska et al., 1994). However, these laboratory
columns are generally unrepresentative of arable lands because
they have very small soil surface areas. Depending on their size and
design, field lysimeters can be sufficiently representative of field
parameters while at the same time can be readily instrumented for
detailed monitoring of all components of the soil water and N
balance of the targeted farming system.
Lysimeters have been used for a variety of purposes in recent
decades (Basso et al., 1995; Howell et al., 1985; Martin et al., 1994;
Owens, 1987; Rasse et al., 2000; Reeder, 1986; Ritchie and Burnett,
1968; Yang et al., 2014) and specifically for the measurement of
percolation of water beneath the vegetation root zone and water
use through evapotranspiration processes (Meißner et al., 2010).
The ability to monitor drainage over the entire year with large
lysimeters contributes to useful insights into the temporal
variation in NO
3 –N leaching (Basso and Ritchie, 2005).
Although much work have been done to evaluate N manage-
ment effects on potential N loss, the evaluation of management of
N application and irrigation for controlling N losses in the winter
wheat season of winter wheat/summer maize intensive crop
rotation systems has not been conducted. The objective of this
series of papers is to determine the effects of N fertilizer
management and irrigation on N losses through ammonia (NH3)
volatilization and NO
3 leaching; and on N and water-use
efficiencies of winter wheat and summer maize grown in rotation
in large drainage lysimeters. It is part of the Chinese component of
the NUE-Crops project conducted with sponsorship from the
European Union Framework Programme 7.
The objective of this first paper is to describe the construction
and operation of the lysimeter/rain shelter facility at SDAU, China
and its testing, validation and comparison of the growth of wheat
in these lysimeters to field grown crops. The N- and water-use
efficiencies of the crops grown in this facility will be reported in
other articles within this series.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. The lysimeter/rain shelter facility at Shandong Agricultural
University
The lysimeter facility was constructed at the Corn Technology
Innovation Center of the HHP (36 090 N, 117 090 E, 128 m above sea
level) located at SDAU, Tai'an City, Shandong Province, China. The
region is in a sub-humid, warm–temperate, continental, monsoon
climate zone with four distinct seasons. The average annual rainfall
was 697 mm, most of which fell during summer and autumn. The
annual average air temperature was 12.9  C, with an average
monthly temperature range from 2.6  C in January to 26.4  C in July.
The total annual solar radiant energy was 508.93 kJ cm
2, the
highest radiant energy value was in May and the lowest in
December. The frost-free season lasted 195 days, varying from 161
days to 241 days in different years. The climate in Tai'an is suitable
for two crop plantings a year.
The lysimeter/rainshelter setup was built in 2005. It consisted
of 44 individual lysimeter, each with dimensions of 2.5  2.5  2 m
(length  width  depth). The lysimeters were arranged in four
rows, each row comprising 11 units. A concrete platform 2.5 m
wide was constructed between two rows of lysimeters, level with
the tops of the lysimeters to facilitate access, measurements, and
observation. This platform was also the roof of a 3 m-high
underground access chamber that permitted collection of soil
solution samples and drainage water, and observations of crop
roots. Two automatically operated triple-folding rain shelters were
installed over the lysimeters. One shelter was deployed over rows 1
and 2, and another over rows 3 and 4. During periods of
precipitation, and for experiments where natural rainfall is not
required, the shelters automatically moved along tracks to cover
the lysimeters, preventing rain from falling onto them. A schematic
diagram view of the lysimeter setup is depicted in Fig. 1.
The walls and floors of the drainage lysimeters were
constructed from 0.255 m-thick concrete, which eliminated the
possibility of lateral nutrient and water losses from the lysimeters,
or exchanges with the groundwater. Thus, the lysimeters were
isolated from the surrounding soil environment but would have a
similar temperature regime. The bottom of the lysimeters had
slopes of 4% to the front to facilitate drainage. A 0.15 m depth of
gravel was packed into the bottom of each device, followed by
0.05 m of coarse sand. Gravel and coarse sand can prevent soil
washout through the drain pipes and facilitate drainage of excess
water. Soil was packed above this sand.
The soil in the lysimeters (1.80 m deep) was collected from a
nearby farmland. Soil was dug out in 0.10 m layers, which were
backfilled into each lysimeter in the same order of extraction. After
backfilling, each soil layer was watered several times to consolidate
it to the density of the original soil profile from which it had been
extracted. Physical and chemical parameters of the soil are listed in
Table 1, the variability between lysimeters was small, with
coefficients of variation mostly below 10%.
In the process of backfilling, two ceramic suction cups (CSCs)
were installed in each lysimeter at soil depths of 0.10, 0.30, 0.50,
0.75, 1.00, 1.50, and 2.00 m. Before installation, each CSC was
washed with distilled water five times, and then immersed in
distilled water for 24 h. The two CSC in each soil layer were
installed in diagonal positions 0.60 m from the two edges of the
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the lysimeter/rainshelter facility.
 L. Gu et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 144 (2014) 133–140 135

Table 1
Physical properties and chemical properties of soil in the lysimeters.

Soil depth (m) Bulk density Field capacitya pH Total N NHþ

4 –N (mg kg

1
) NO

3 –N (mg kg

1
) Organic matter
(g cm
3) (g g
1) (mg g
1) (%)

0–0.2 1.10  0.1 0.25  0.01 7.30  0.38 0.77  0.05 3.37  0.28 14.17  1.37 10.79  0.54
0.2–0.4 1.18  0.05 0.25  0.01 7.30  0.36 0.75  0.05 3.37  0.22 12.48  1.06 10.20  0.50
0.4–0.6 1.18  0.13 0.25  0.01 7.20  0.04 0.65  0.06 3.42  0.31 10.78  1.18 9.38  0.35
0.6–0.8 1.20  0.07 0.25  0.01 7.20  0.47 0.56  0.05 3.45  0.27 9.38  0.87 8.38  0.34
0.8–1.0 1.18  0.18 0.26  0.01 7.20  0.43 0.52  0.06 3.33  0.21 8.24  0.69 6.73  0.47
1.0–1.2 1.25  0.12 0.26  0.02 7.40  0.28 0.37  0.04 3.48  0.30 7.08  0.72 5.85  0.21
1.2–1.4 1.34  0.13 0.26  0.01 7.40  0.35 0.36  0.03 3.37  0.25 5.92  0.72 4.86  0.21
1.4–1.6 1.34  0.16 0.27  0.01 7.40  0.30 0.35  0.03 3.3  0.29 5.49  0.74 4.66  0.20
1.6–1.8 1.37  0.12 0.27  0.02 7.40  0.38 0.33  0.03 3.39  0.38 4.48  0.81 4.41  0.17
a
Field capacity determined at
30 kPa the soil water potential.

device. Each CSC was connected to a hard plastic tube linked to a
Buchner flask, which was connected to a vacuum device located in
the access chamber. After irrigation, we were able to aspirate soil
solution into the Buchner flask providing the presence of sufficient
water around the CSC. On one side of the access chamber, each
lysimeter had a clear acrylic plastic panel, which allowed
observation of roots, including measurement of their growth
rates. Two holes were reserved at the bottom of each lysimeter
connected with a plastic tube to two 25 L buckets in which we can
collect percolation or leaching water. At the center of each
lysimeter, we installed a 2.4 m-long aluminum neutron moisture
meter access tube for nondestructive measurement of soil water
content. A cross-sectional diagram of a lysimeter with all
instrumentation is presented in Fig. 2 and a photograph of the
access chamber in Fig. 3.
From 2006 to 2009, all lysimeters were treated in the same way
to achieve uniformity. We planted wheat followed by maize in all
lysimeters without fertilizer, but all crops were irrigated with
adequate amounts of water in order to achieve leaching. This
resulted in low soil fertility and uniform physical and chemical
properties of the soil across the lysimeters.
2.2. Experimental design
In the period of 2009–2012, the lysimeters were used to study
the effects of different fertilization regimes and agronomic
practices on the performance of winter wheat/summer maize as
well as the NUE and WUE of these crops. The experiment was
deployed as a randomized complete block design comprising
duplicates of 16 treatments (2 wheat/maize varieties  2 irrigation
levels  2 N fertilizer types  2 N application rates). The winter
wheat varieties were the high NUE variety Shimai 15 (SM15) and
the low NUE variety Jimai 19 (JM19) and the summer maize were
the high NUE variety ZhongNong 99 (ZN99) and the low NUE
LaiNong 14 (LN14). Details of the lysimeter treatments are
presented in Table 2.

Fig. 2. Schematic diagram (side-view) of the lysimeter and its instrumentation.

136 L. Gu et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 144 (2014) 133–140
Fig. 3. Photograph of the access chamber belowground. The lysimeter on the right
has a clear acrylic viewing panel. Below, the series of solution collectors is shown;
the vessels on the floor are the percolate collectors.
A field experiment was also conducted as part of the NUE-Crops
project at the Lingxian research station of the Chinese Academy of
Agricultural Sciences (CAAS), Shandong province. It consisted of a
wider range of treatments with four wheat varieties. The
performance of wheat in the lysimeters will be compared to
wheat in field trials within the same project, to assess whether
growth in the lysimeter reflects field crops.
The N fertilizer types used were fresh cow manure (M) and urea
(U). The two N fertilizer application rates were 180 kg N ha
1 for
wheat and 200 kg N ha
1 for maize (M1 for manure and U1 for
urea), and 90 kg N ha
1 for wheat and 100 kg N ha
1 for maize (M2
for manure and U2 for urea), respectively. Manure was applied at
sowing time as a starter fertilizer, and urea was applied in two
steps: 50% at sowing and 50% at the jointing stage (for wheat) and
or at the 12-leaf stage (for maize). Cow manure was acquired
directly from a dairy farm, stockpiled, and covered with plastic
sheets until it is required. Total N, phosphorus pentoxide (P2O5),
and potassium oxide (K2O) contents in the manure and urea were
measured before application. All treatments received equal
phosphate and potassium as calcium superphosphate and
potassium sulfate to levels in the M1 treatment. Manure, calcium
superphosphate, and potassium sulfate were spread on the soil
surface and then mixed into the top 20 cm soil layer manually.
Straw from the previous crop was removed from the plots.
At the start of the trial, 200 mm water was applied before
sowing wheat across all treatments to ensure uniformity of soil
water at the start of the experiment. Two irrigation levels of
500–550 mm of water (W1), and 250–350 mm of water (W2), were
applied during the wheat growing season. For maize, two irrigation
levels were 525 (W1) and 263 mm (W2), which was supplied in
7 applications for maize (75 mm and 38 mm each for W1 and W2,
respectively). Details of the irrigation treatments in wheat season
Table 2
Experimental treatment combinations in the wheat and maize season.
Variety Irrigation N fertilizer treatmenta
M1 M2
JM19/LN14 W1 JW1M1/LW1M1 JW1M2/LW1M2
W2 JW2M1/LW2M1 JW2M2/LW2M2
SM15/ZN99 W1 SW1M1/ZW1M1 SW1M2/ZW1M2
W2 SW2M1/ZW2M1 SW2M2/ZW2M2
a
See section of materials and methods for full explanations of abbreviations for wheat varieties, irrigation regimens (an expanded explanation of irrigation treatments is
provided in Table 3), and N fertilizer treatments.
are presented in Tables 3 and 4. For the first 3 years, rainfall was
prevented by the use of rain shelter. Hence water was supplied to
all lysimeters as irrigation according to the treatments and rainfall
was excluded. In later years, the rain shelter will not be deployed to
included climatic effects.
Winter wheat was sown at a density of 1800,000 seeds ha
1,
with 0.20 m row spacing. The planting dates were 14 October in
2009, 10 October in 2010, and 9 October in 2011; harvesting dates
were 12 June in 2010, 10 June in 2011, and 9 June in 2012.
Cultivation practices, including controls of pests, diseases and
weeds, were similar to those commonly used in this region.
2.3. Sample collection and measurements
Grain yield (GY) of wheat was sampled from the 1.5  1.5 m
portion in the central area of each lysimeter and other plant
sampling and measurements were performed in the immediate
surrounding area of each plot. Dry matter (DM) was calculated by
weighing oven-dried harvest samples.
Soil solution was extracted from each CSC 72 h after irrigation
when the soil water content was sufficiently high. A vacuum of
30 kPa was applied to each CSC to collect soil solution samples.
After measuring the volumes of the extract, we determine the
NO
þ
3 –N and NH4 –N contents in the soil solutions with an Auto
analyzer III (AA3) continuous flow analytical system (SEAL
Analytical, Norderstedt, Germany).
NO
3 –N leaching loss was calculated by multiplying the
drainage volumes (collected from the base of the lysimeter) for
each period by the corresponding NO
3 –N concentrations. Soil
water contents at 0.10 m intervals to a depth of 1.8 m were
measured with a neutron moisture gauge (CNC503B; Beijing Super
Power Technology Co., Ltd. Beijing, China) before and after
irrigation, between irrigations, before sowing, and after harvesting.
Soil water content change and irrigation amounts were used to
calculate crop water use.
2.4. Statistical analysis
We used SAS system for Windows 9.0 software (SAS Institute,
Cary, IN, USA) to perform analyses of variance (ANOVAs). The least-
significant difference (LSD) multiple comparisons test was used to
determine whether differences existed in GY and DM among
different treatments. The probability level for identifying signifi-
cant effects was 0.05.
3. Results
3.1. Testing the lysimeters
For testing the lysimeters, we investigated whether water
supplied to these lysimeters would be consistently equal to the
water lost from these units. In this paper the term “water balance”
was used for the difference between irrigation water supplied and
U1 U2 No fertilizer
JW1U1/LW1U1 JW1U2/LW1U2 –
JW2U1/LW2U1 JW2U2/LW2U2 –
SW1U1/ZW1U1 SW1U2/ZW1U2 SCK/ZCK
SW2U1/ZW2U1 SW2U2/ZW2U2 –
 L. Gu et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 144 (2014) 133–140 137

Table 3
Irrigation dates and levels for W1 and W2 in wheat season from 2009 to 2012.

2009–2010 Date 10-Oct 2009 – 13-Mar-10 31-Mar-10 5-May-10 20-May-10 Total (mm)
DAPa
4 146 164 199 216

Treatment W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2

Irrigation level (mm) 200 200 – – 75 37.5 75 37.5 75 37.5 75 37.5 500 350

2010–2011 Date 10-Oct 2010 27-Nov-10 11-Mar-11 9-Apr-11 6-May-11 22-May-11 Total (mm)
DAP 0 48 152 181 208 224

Treatment W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2

Irrigation level (mm) 100 50 50 25 50 25 100 50 100 50 100 50 500 250

2011–2012 Date 9-Oct 2011 7-Nov-11 10-Mar-11 8-Apr-12 2-May-12 19-May-12 Total (mm)
DAP 0 29 153 182 206 223

Treatment W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2 W1 W2

Irrigation level (mm) 100 50 50 25 100 50 100 50 100 50 100 50 550 275
a
DAP, days after planting.

Table 4
Irrigation dates in maize season from 2010 to 2012.

Year Growth stage

Sowing 6-leaf stage 9-leaf stage 12-leaf stage Tasseling stage Blister stage Dough stage

2010 18-Jun 10-Jul 23-Jul 1-Aug 14-Aug 28-Aug 15-Sep

2011 18-Jun 21-Jul 29-Jul 5-Aug 12-Aug 26-Aug 15-Sep
2012 18-Jun 12-Jul 22-Jul 31-Jul 8-Aug 22-Aug 9-Sep

measured total water output. Water balance may be expressed as a
percentage of the irrigation water supplied, as shown in Table 5.
The differences between inputs and outputs were all less than 10%.
The discrepancies between measured water output and actual
water supplied averaged across all the lysimeters are plotted in
Fig. 4. The average slope of the linear regression was 0.95.
3.2. Crop grain yield and dry matter
3-year average of GY and DM of wheat in the lysimeters are
shown in Table 6. The effects of irrigation and N rate are significant
in 3 years. Across all years, GY and DM values under W1 were
significantly higher than under W2. Under W1, GY was significantly

Table 5
Measurements of changes in soil water contents, amount of percolation and water extraction from the lysimeters during the wheat season and the water balance of 2009–
2010.

Treatment D S-Soil solution extracted (mm) I- WE-water extracted by plants (mm) Total Water balance
WC Irrigation water
(mm) (mm) use
(WU)
Reviving Jointing Filling Maturity Sum Wintering Reviving Jointing Flagging Anthesis Sum I
WU (%
stage stage stage (mm) stage stage stage Irrigation)

JW1M1 75.8 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.5 1.0 500 52.5 42.1 77.2 119.9 84.1 375.8 452.6 47.4 9.5
JW1M2 92.1 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.6 1.1 500 29.9 70.0 83.0 121.6 87.5 392.1 485.4 14.6 2.9
JW1U1 75.8 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.5 0.9 500 25.5 62.9 87.4 116.1 83.8 375.8 452.4 47.6 9.5
JW1U2 78.5 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.6 500 23.1 60.6 77.9 125.2 91.7 378.5 457.6 42.4 8.5

JW2M1 90.5 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 350 46.7 22.4 54.7 79.4 37.3 240.5 331.1 18.9 5.4
JW2M2 90.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 350 34.5 32.5 55.3 81.9 36.0 240.2 330.5 19.5 5.6
JW2U1 97.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 350 37.5 28.6 62.1 80.9 37.9 247.1 344.4 5.6 1.6
JW2U2 98.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 350 41.4 24.0 52.6 84.5 45.9 248.4 346.9 3.1 0.9

SW1M1 76.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.4 500 24.2 61.7 81.9 130.3 78.3 376.5 453.5 46.5 9.3
SW1M2 79.1 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.6 500 30.9 53.7 82.6 129.5 82.3 379.1 458.2 41.8 8.4
SW1U1 78.8 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.5 500 25.2 59.7 80.9 130.6 82.3 378.8 457.5 42.5 8.5
SW1U2 99.3 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.1 0.5 500 42.3 63.3 84.8 133.2 75.7 399.3 498.6 1.4 0.3

SW2M1 96.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 350 25.5 44.1 63.3 75.1 38.3 246.3 342.6 7.4 2.1
SW2M2 110.8 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 350 20.6 52.8 58.8 89.8 38.8 260.8 371.5
21.5
6.1
SW2U1 106.5 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 350 19.9 49.7 60.8 87.1 39.0 256.5 363.0
13.0
3.7
SW2U2 100.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 350 32.2 39.5 57.5 84.6 36.5 250.3 350.6
0.6
0.2

In the table above, WU (total water use) was the sum of soil water consumption (D WC), soil solution extracted (S) and water extracted by plants (WE).
138 L. Gu et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 144 (2014) 133–140

1J U
10000 1S U
1J M

Grain yield (kg ha-1)

1S M
8000
2J U
2S U
6000 2J M
2S M

4000

2000
0 50 100 150 200 250
N application rate (kg N ha-1)

Fig. 4. Relationship between total water used and water provided by irrigation to Fig. 5. Comparison of wheat yields in the lysimeters (500 mm irrigation) and in a
the 2009–2010 wheat. field located in Ling Xian (228 mm irrigation) in the period 2009–2010. The
numerals 1 and 2 refer to wheat grown in the field and in the lysimeters,
respectively; J and M refer to wheat varieties Jimai 19 and Shimai15, respectively; U
higher under elevated N supply (180 kg N ha
1) than that under and M refer to urea and manure fertilizers, respectively.
reduced N supply (90 kg N ha
1), but the N supply rate had no
effect under W2. For the 3-year average of GY and DM, no
difference was observed in either GY or DM between manure and urea treatments and between varieties JM19 and SM15 under
either irrigation level. The results for W1 are consistent with the
results obtained in the field at Ling Xian.
Table 6 A comparison of GY of the same wheat varieties between the
3-year average of crop yield and dry matter for each lysimeter treatment. lysimeters and the field at Ling Xian station (2009–2010), which is
part of the same NUE-Crops project, is depicted in Fig. 5 (Wenyan
Treatments Grain yield (kg ha
1) Dry matter (kg ha
1)
Sun personal communication). GY for the lysimeters were
JW1M1 8319.3a 16674.8a significantly higher than those in the field associated with the
JW1M2 6886.2b 15926.0a
higher soil available N in the lysimeters, but it responded in a
JW1U1 8472.5a 17942.2a
JW1U2 6996.3b 16396.7a similar pattern to increased N application rates as the field crop.
LSDa 672.8 4349.5 Contrary to the field crop, wheat in the lysimeter show similar
yields under manure and urea.
JW2M1 5697.7a 12342.9a
JW2M2 5061.0a 10808.1a
JW2U1 5693.2a 13260.2a 4. Discussion
JW2U2 5297.5a 12133.0a
LSD 2616.2 6226.9
Lysimeters have been demonstrated to be more reliable and
SW1M1 8462.9a 19567.6ab accurate for in situ water and solute assessment (Meißner et al.,
SW1M2 7711.2b 17704.6b 2010). As the most accurate measurement, they have been used to
SW1U1 9012.0a 20520.6a simulate soil water balances (Soldevilla-Martinez et al., 2013),
SW1U2 7616.3b 18230.6ab
LSD 671.1 2486.9
water movement and nitrate dynamics (Phogat et al., 2013).
Therefore, it is essential for the reliable extrapolation of results
SW2M1 4887.0a 12624.1a obtained in these experimental units, that they are representative
SW2M2 4342.4a 12391.1a
SW2U1 4969.7a 11186.1a
of field agricultural conditions. The sum of outputs measured in
SW2U2 4315.8a 10970.8a water content changes over different growth stages (Table 4),
LSD 3854.7 6747.3 percolation, and water uptake by the crop should be similar to the
Variety
volume of irrigation water supplied. The small differences between
JM19 6553.0a 14435.5a irrigation water supplied and measured total water output
SM15 6414.7a 15399.4a indicated that these large lysimeters had achieved acceptable
LSD 1833.3 4349.5 performance levels. The average slope of the linear regression
(0.95) demonstrates that the measurements of recovered water
Irrigation level
W1 7934.6a 17870.4a consistently underestimated total inputs by 5%. Soil water content
W2 5033.0b 11964.5b was measured one day after irrigation, which leads to the
LSD 2640.4 5337.3 measured data being slightly lower than the actual value due to
evaporation from the soil surface. However, the small error level is
Fertilizer type
Manure 6421.0a 14754.9a
acceptable for such large field lysimeters.
Urea 6546.7a 15080.0a Although some experimental evidence indicated that GY was
LSD 4168.1 3737.1 unaffected by fertilizer type (organic and inorganic) (Basso and
Ritchie, 2005; Cartagena et al., 1995), most wheat yield in organic
Fertilizer level
farming systems were lower (by 20–40%) than in conventional
180 kg N ha
1 6939.3a 15514.8a
90 kg N ha
1 6028.3b 14320.1a systems; N uptake is also reduced under manure fertilization
LSD 1737.6 3685.8 (Berry et al., 2002; Dawson et al., 2008; Watson et al., 2002). Under
Numbers followed by same alphabets along the column are not significantly
W1 irrigation and the same N rate in this experiment, GY with urea
different at p < 0.05. fertilization exceeded that with manure fertilization for
a
The value of least significant difference. 2009–2010 and 2010–2011, but the trend was reversed in the
 L. Gu et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 144 (2014) 133–140
third year. When averaged, there were no significant differences
between urea and manure at the same N application rates.
Compared to the field at Ling Xian station, the soil in the
lysimeters have significantly higher N concentrations throughout
the profile (270 kg N ha
1 versus 107 kg N ha
1) and received
more irrigation water (500 mm versus 228 mm). These are likely
the main reasons for the differences in yield between the
lysimeter and field. The high initial fertility would have resulted
in adequate N supply in manure applied soil to achieve maximum
yield, hence no difference was recorded between manure and
urea fertilization. The field at Ling Xian had a water table at
1.5–2.0 m depth, which would have contributed to crop water use,
but the magnitude of this effect on yield is not clear. Using
instrumented lysimeters, Lou and Sophocleous (2010) estimated
that a water table at 1.5 m depth in Yucheng contributes up to 25%
of the crop water requirement of wheat. Using Lou and
Sophocleous' (2010) estimation, the water table at Ling Xian
would contribute approximately 76 mm to the water provided by
irrigation, for a total water input of approximately 304 mm in Ling
Xian, which is comparable to the W2 irrigation in the lysimeters,
although the distribution of this water application are not the
same. GY from the lysimeters under W2 irrigation treatments
were lower and grain yields were closer to the yields from the
field at Ling Xian.
5. Conclusions
Despite differences in yield, it can be concluded that the wheat
crops grown in the lysimeters/rain shelter facility were compara-
ble to those grown in an agricultural field with similar soils and
climatic conditions. The lysimeters/rain shelter facility with 44
drainage lysimeters provides a research facility that can be used
reliably to investigate soil water and nutrient balances within the
crop root zone. Therefore, the facility is an appropriate comple-
ment to field studies for quantifying losses of N through deep
leaching and volatilization of NH3, topics that are treated in the
subsequent article within this series.
Acknowledgments
The authors gratefully acknowledge funding from the European
Community within the Seventh Framework Programme for
Research, Technological Development and Demonstration Activi-
ties for the Integrated Project NUE-CROPS FP7-CP-IP 222645. The
views expressed in this publication are the sole responsibility of
the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
European Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any
person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the
use that might be made of the information contained herein.
The research was also supported by the Natural Science
Foundation of China (grant number: 31171497), Special Fund for
Agro-scientific Research in the Public Interest (201203096,
201203100), National Basic Research Program (973 Program)
(2011CB100105), National Science and Technology Ministry
(2013BAD07B06-2).
References
Angle, J.S., Cross, C.M., Hill, R.L., McIntosh, M.S., 1993. Soil nitrate concentrations
under corn as affected by tillage, manure, and fertilizer applications. J. Environ.
Qual. 22, 141–147.
Bar-Yosef, B., 1999. Advances in fertigation. Adv. Agron. 65, 1–77.
Basso, B., Ritchie, J.T., 2005. Impact of compost, manure and inorganic fertilizer on
nitrate leaching and yield for a 6-year maize-alfalfa rotation in Michigan. Agric.
Ecosyst. Environ. 108, 329–341.
139
Basso, B., Ritchie, J.T., Martin, E.C., 1995. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer management on
NO3–-N leaching. Modelling the fate of agro-chemicals and fertilizers in the
environment. ESA and Unipress, Padova, Italy, pp. 539–548.
Beeson, R.C., 2011. Weighing lysimeter systems for quantifying water use and
studies of controlled water stress for crops grown in low bulk density
substrates. Agric. Water Manage. 98, 967–976.
Berry, P.M., Sylvester-Bradley, R., Philipps, L., Hatch, D.J., Cuttle, S.P., Rayns, F.W.,
Gosling, P., 2002. Is the productivity of organic farms restricted by the supply of
available nitrogen? Soil Use Manage. 18, 248–255.
Cartagena, M.C., Vallejo, A., Diez, J.A., Bustos, A., Caballero, R., Roman, R., 1995. Effect
of the type of fertilizer and source of irrigation water on N use in a maize crop.
Field Crops Res. 44, 33–39.
China Agriculture Yearbook 1982–2008. China Agricultural Press, Beijing.
Chopra, K.R., 2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being: Policy Responses: Findings
of the Responses Working Group, vol. 3. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp. 295–
311.
Council Directive 98/83/EC. Concerning the Quality of Water Intended for Human
Consumption, 1998, 3rd November.
Cui, Y.T., 2000. Environment Protection, Chemical Fertilizers and Ecological
Environment Protection. Chemical Industry Press, China.
Dawson, J.C., Huggins, D.R., Jones, S.S., 2008. Characterizing nitrogen use efficiency
in natural and agricultural ecosystems to improve the performance of cereal
crops in low-input and organic agricultural systems. Field Crops Res. 107, 89–
101.
De Rooij, G.H., Stagnitti, F., 2002. Spatial and temporal distribution of solute leaching
in heterogeneous soils: analysis and application to multisampler lysimeter data.
J. Contam. Hydrol. 54, 329–346.
Fedkiw, J., 1991. Nitrate occurrence in U.S. waters (and related questions): a
reference summary of published sources from an agricultural perspective.
USDA Question 1, 2.

Gärdenäs, A.I., Hopmans, J.W., Hanson, B.R., Šimunek, J., 2005. Two-dimensional
modelling of nitrate leaching for various fertigation scenarios under micro-
irrigation. Agric. Water Manage. 74, 219–242.
Howell, T.A., McCormick, R.L., Phene, C.J., 1985. Design and installation of large
weighing lysimeters. Trans. ASAE 28, 106–112.
Hu, K.L., Li, B.G., Huang, Y.F., Chen, D.L., White, R., 2005. Stochastic simulation and
risk assessment of nitrate leaching at field scale. Acta Ped. Sinica 42, 909–915.
Jones C., Olson-Rutz K., 2011. Crop and fertilizer management practices to minimize
nitrate leaching. Agriculture and Natural Resources (Fertilizers). Mont Guide.
MT201103AG New 1(11).
Ju, X.T., Xing, G.X., Chen, X.P., Zhang, S.L., Zhang, L.J., Liu, X.J., Zhang, F.S., 2009.
Reducing environmental risk by improving N management in intensive Chinese
agricultural systems. PNAS 106, 3041–3046.
Karapanagioti, H.K., Gaganis, P., Burganos, V.N., 2004. Reactive transport of volatile
organic compound mixtures in the unsaturated zone: modeling and tuning
with lysimeter data. Environ. Modell. and Softw. 19, 435–450.
Krzyszowska, A.J., Allen, R.D., Vance, G.F., 1994. Assessment of the fate of two
herbicides in a Wyoming rangeland soil: column studies. J. Environ. Qual. 23,
1051–1058.
Liu, G.D., Wu, W.L., Zhang, J., 2005. Regional differentiation of non-point source
pollution of agriculturederived nitrate nitrogen in groundwater in northern
China. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 107, 211–220.
Luo, Y., Sophocleous, M., 2010. Seasonal groundwater contribution to crop-water
use assessed with lysimeter observations and model simulations. J. Hydrol. 389,
325–335.
Mailhol, J.C., Ruelle, P., Nemeth, I., 2001. Impact of fertilization practices on nitrogen
leaching under irrigation. Irrigation Sci. 20, 139–147.
Martin, E.C., Loudon, T.L., Ritchie, J.T., Werner, A., 1994. Use of drainage lysimeters to
evaluate nitrogen and irrigation management strategies to minimize NO3
N
leaching in maize production. Trans. ASAE 37, 79–83.
Matsuyama, N., Saigusa, M., Sakaiya, E., Tamakawa, K., Oyamada, Z., Kudo, K., 2005.
Acidification and soil productivity of allophanic Andosols affected by heavy
application of fertilizers. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 51, 117–123.
Meißner, R., Prasad, M.N.V., Du Laing, G., Rinklebe, J., 2010. Lysimeter application for
measuring the water and solute fluxes with high precision. Curr. Sci. 99, 601–
607.
Owens, L.B., 1987. NO3–N leaching losses from monolith lysimeters as influenced by
nitrapyrin. J. Environ. Qual. 16, 34–38.

Phogat, V., Skewes, M.A., Cox, J.W., Alam, J., Grigson, G., Šimunek, J., 2013. Evaluation
of water movement and nitrate dynamics in a lysimeter planted with an orange
tree. Agric. Water Manage. 127, 74–84.
Rasse, D.P., Ritchie, J.T., Peterson, W.R., Wei, J., Smucker, A.J.M., 2000. Rye cover crop
and nitrogen fertilization effects on NO3-N leaching in inbred maize fields. J.
Environ. Qual. 29, 298–304.
Reeder, J.D., 1986. A non-weighing lysimeter design for field studies using nitrogen-
15. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 50, 1224–1227.
Ritchie, J.T., Burnett, E., 1968. A precision weighing lysimeter for row crop water use
studies. Agron. J. 60, 545–549.
Soldevilla-Martinez, M., López-Urrea, R., Martínez-Molina, L., Quemada, M., Lizaso,
J.I., 2013. Improving simulation of soil water balance using lysimeter
observations in a semiarid climate. Procedia Environ. Sci. 19, 534–542.
Tyson, A., Dixon, M.L., Segars, W., 1992. Your Drinking Water: Nitrates Extension
Publication 819-5. University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1981. Investigation of nitrates in ground
water. Draft, Region VII, Kansas City, MO.
140 L. Gu et al. / Soil & Tillage Research 144 (2014) 133–140
Waddell, J.T., Weil, R.R., 2006. Effects of fertilizer placement on solute leaching
under ridge tillage and no tillage. Soil Till. Res. 90, 194–204.
Watson, C.A., Atkinson, D., Gosling, P., Jackson, L.R., Rayns, F.W., 2002. Managing soil
fertility in organic farming systems. Soil Use Manage. 18, 239–247.
Yang, G., Pu, R.L., Zhao, C.J., Xue, X.Z., 2014. Estimating high spatiotemporal
resolution evapotranspiration over a winter wheat field using an IKONOS image
based complementary relationship and Lysimeter observations. Agric. Water
Manage. 133, 34–43.
Ye, Y.L., Huang, Y.F., Liu, C.S., Qu, R.T., Song, H.Y., 2010. Effect of in-season nitrogen
management on grain yield and nitrogen use efficiency in wheat. Acta Agron.
Sinica 36, 1578–1584.
Zhang, W.L., Tian, Z.X., Zhang, N., Li, X.Q., 1996. Nitrate pollution of groundwater in
northern China. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 59, 223–231.
Zhao, G.C., Lu, Y.G., Yuan, H.W., 2006. The effect of different application amount on
physiological characteristic and yield of wheat. Acta Agron. Sinica 32, 723–727.
Zhao, R.F., Chen, X.P., Zhang, F.S., 2005. Study on nitrogen optimized management at
different growing stage of winter wheat based on nutrient balance and soil test.
Chin. Agric. Sci. Bull. 21, 211–215.
Zhu, Z.L., Chen, D.L., 2002. Nitrogen fertilizer use in China-contributions to food
production, impacts on the environment and best management strategies. Nutr.
Cycl. Agroecosyst. 63, 117–127.