Enhanced-efficiency nitrogenous fertilizers coupled with organic amendments: A sustainable approach to mitigating nitrogen emissions and leaching in rice-wheat cropping systems

Enhanced-efficiency nitrogenous fertilizers coupled with organic amendments: A sustainable approach to mitigating nitrogen emissions and leaching in rice-wheat cropping systems | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Enhanced-efficiency nitrogenous fertilizers coupled with organic amendments: A sustainable approach to mitigating nitrogen emissions and leaching in rice-wheat cropping systems Ghulam Murtaza, Tajammal Hussain, Munir Hussain Zia, Wasim Javed This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4990321/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 26 May, 2025 Read the published version in International Journal of Environmental Research → Version 1 posted 5 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Excessive use of nitrogenous (N) fertilizers for intensified cropping has negative environmental impacts, including the emissions of nitrous oxide (N2O) and ammonia (NH3), as well as nitrate (NO3-) leaching, however, enhanced efficiency nitrogenous fertilizers (EENFs) could be an innovative and most effective option for minimizing N losses.This study evaluated the effects of various commercially available EENFs on N losses in a rice-wheat cropping system under both saturated and aerated conditions in various incubation and lysimeter experiments. The incubation study revealed that EENFs significantly reduced NH3 volatilization and N2O emissions with coated urea products like neem-coated urea, nutraful urea, biomaterials-coated urea, and zabardast urea, compared to standard uncoated urea at both 65% and 100% water-holding capacity. In lysimeter experiments, neem-coated urea and nutraful urea achieved the highest reductions in NH3 and N2O emissions, and NO3- leaching in both rice and wheat crops. Moreover, neem-coated urea increased partial N factor productivity and partial N balance in rice (10.04%, 20.12%) and wheat (7.92%, 21.61%), respectively. The integrated use of neem-coated urea and biochar was found to be the best, as it reduced the emissions of NH3 (26.16% and 28.57%) and N2O (24.28% and 28.04%), as well as the leaching of NO3- (23.53% and 14.55%) under rice and wheat crops, respectively. As countries are committed to halving N waste by 2030 under the UN Colombo Declaration, neem-coated urea coupled with biochar is the best option for minimizing N losses and enhancing N use efficiency. Nitrogen use efficiency Coated urea Biochar NH3 volatilization N2O emissions NO3 leaching Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Introduction Food security concerns coupled with the decline in agricultural lands due to massive urbanization and industrialization have demanded productivity enhancement of existing agricultural lands. Increased worldwide population and reduced agricultural lands pose incredible pressures to agricultural production (Wang et al ., 2022). By 2050, world agriculture will need to produce 70% more food to feed an additional population of 2.3 billion (FAO, 2009). Increasing global food demand has led to excessive fertilizer application to produce more by intensive cropping in declining land resources (Ghafoor et al ., 2021). Balancing these requirements while addressing environmental concerns associated with synthetic fertilizer use (e.g., gaseous emissions, leaching and runoff of nutrients) remains a challenge for global agriculture. In arid and semi-arid climates like Pakistan, sustainable crop production is threatened due to declining soil fertility and poor organic matter. Feeding the ever-increasing population of the country demands immediate attention to the efficient use of crop inputs, especially fertilizers. Fertilizer usage enormously contributes to satisfying increased crop productivity under intensive cropping systems while simultaneously ensuring food security (Albahri et al ., 2023). The application of synthetic nitrogen (N) fertilizer is a critical aspect of modern extensive cropping systems for crop management and one of the decisive factors in enhancing crop production in arable lands (Yaseen et al ., 2021). During the past six decades, there has been a significant increase in the consumption of synthetic N fertilizers to support intensive farming. The nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) is economically important because improper use of this input (including its application in excess of the crop requirement) can result in significant N losses, thereby decreasing NUE, and increasing crop production cost and environmental concerns (Li et al ., 2017). In many countries around the globe, not only the application of N fertilizer is excessive but overall, its efficiency is very low due to various N losses including nitrous oxide (N 2 O) and ammonia (NH 3 ) emissions along with nitrate (NO 3 ) leaching and runoff (Whetton et al .,2022; Manzoor et al ., 2022). Excessive or improper use of synthetic N fertilizers ultimately leads to environmental concerns, such as air pollution from gaseous emissions, water pollution from leaching and runoff, soil degradation, and ecosystem disruption (Milanas et al ., 2022; Anas et al ., 2020; Wang et al ., 2022). Thus, modern farming practices should focus on responsible and sustainable N fertilizer management to balance the benefits of increased crop yields with environmental conservation. Agriculture is one of the major sources of greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions. Gaseous emissions such as nitrogen oxides (NO x ), N 2 O, and NH 3 from agricultural sources adversely affect air quality and account for abundant contributions to climate change (Keneeth et al ., 2022; Hassan et al ., 2022). There is a huge concern about the undesirable effects linked to the release of N emissions from highly fertilized arable lands. Considerable quantities of N can be lost from the root zone of crops through NH 3 volatilization and N 2 O emissions which can account for up to 30-39% and 0.8-2% of the urea-N applied, respectively (Cai et al., 2002; Woodley et al ., 2020). N 2 O is one of the most significant GHG, having around 298 times greater global-warming potential in comparison to CO 2 (IPCC 2013). The emissions of NH 3 also have detrimental impacts on the overall atmosphere since it also acts as a secondary source of N 2 O emissions (Beusen et al ., 2008). For sustainable soil health, economical crop production, and protection of the environment, there is a desperate need to focus on alternate N fertilizer sources, mitigation strategies to diminish N losses, and implement improved fertilizer management practices (Mahmud et al ., 2021), as proposed by “Colombo Declaration on Sustainable Nitrogen Management” by UN Environment Program, with an ambition to halve N waste by 2030. Enhanced Efficiency Nitrogenous Fertilizers (EENFs) are considered a sustainable solution for decreasing N losses by applying technically innovative approaches for synchronizing crop N demand and N supply (Ghafoor et al ., 2021; Manzoor et al ., 2022). Nitrogenous fertilizers with environment-friendly coatings composed of various materials increase the diffusion period of fertilizer granules by the slow-releasing mechanisms of N nutrients for plant uptake (Chen et al ., 2018; Ghafoor et al., 2021). These coatings can reduce N losses through nitrification, denitrification, volatilization, and leaching, enhance fertilizer longevity in soils, and improve NUE and N uptake by plants. Coated slow-release N granules in EENFs allow N to gradually and efficiently diffuse into the soil, and nitrification and urease inhibitors (UIs) in EENFs slow down the conversion of urea to NH 4 + , and NH 4 + to NO 3 - , respectively (An et al ., 2021). The agronomic and environmental benefits of various types of EENFs have been recently studied. For example, the neem-coated urea (NCU) has been found to increase NUE (and ultimately crop yields) due to its nitrification inhibitor characteristics (Khandey et al . 2017). Bordoloi et al (2020) also reported N 2 O emission reduction in rice fields with the application of starch-coated and neem-coated urea compared to normal uncoated urea. Rice ( Oryza sativa L.) and wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) are two main staple foods feeding over 75% of the world’s population, so the rice-wheat cropping system in Asia is vital for global food security. The NUE of rice is quite low (only 20–30%) as a huge quantity of the applied N is lost to the environment in the forms of N 2 O, NH 3, and NO 3 , leading to inefficient use of N fertilizers (Gu and Yang, 2022). Applied N in an anaerobic submerged condition in the soil is lost in various forms such as denitrification, leaching, and volatilization, out of which dominant N loss results from the volatilization of NH 3 . The efficiency of N fertilizer in wheat is also low and significant gaseous emissions (as N 2 O and NH 3 ) have been reported (Dawar et al . 2020). Therefore, the use of EENFs could be effective in reducing the N losses and enhancing NUE as well as crop yields in rice-wheat rotation (Aasmi et al ., 2022). Of the total N consumption (109.2 million metric tons) consumed worldwide during the year 2021, Asia alone accounted for more than 55% of it (IFASTAT online, see https://www.ifastat.org/databases ). Although Pakistan is among the top four countries in terms of N consumption, it recorded low average yields with the lowest partial N productivity and NUE in wheat, cotton, and rice production. While these three crops account for 75% of the total national N fertilizer consumption in Pakistan compared to that with top producer countries ( Shahzad et al ., 2019). Moreover, there is limited published research about these commercially available EENFs regarding their usage efficiency and reactive N emissions. Efforts to enhance NUE in agriculture are ongoing, aiming to maximize the benefits of N fertilizers while minimizing N losses and their negative impacts on the environment and farm economics. Therefore, finding new management practices, alternate fertilizer solutions, and mitigation strategies for gaseous N losses and enhancing fertilizer NUE is immediately needed. The incorporation of organic manures such as farmyard manure, compost and biochar into soils can improve soil fertility and productivity by providing plant nutrients, enhancing soil properties and microbial activities, thereby reducing the use of synthetic fertilizers. However, the decomposition of organic manures by soil microbes can also lead to increased GHG emissions (Marin-Martinez et al., 2021). The application of organic fertilizers along with synthetic fertilizers could be a promising technique to reduce N losses, enhance the availability of soil N, and thereby increase soil fertility and crop productivity (Zhang, 2022). Through such farming practices, for example, by biochar addition, NH 3 volatilization and N 2 O emissions could be reduced and a higher NUE could be achieved (Jindo et al ., 2020). Organic amendments can either increase or decrease N losses in soils by affecting N dynamics, soil microbial population, enzyme activity, and soil carbon pools, thereby altering N availability and uptake for plant growth and productivity (Niu et al ., 2018; Sigurdarson et al ., 2018; Lee et al ., 2021). It is not yet well understood which mechanisms of N transformation from biochar or compost are involved in N cycling in soil and emissions to the atmosphere, and the degree and consistency of these changes are also not well quantified across various crops, soils, and climatic conditions. To the best of our knowledge, no published studies have been performed to compare the effects of various EENFs used in combination with the biochar/organic amendments in order to assess NH 3 and N 2 O emissions and NO 3 leaching in rice-wheat cropping systems under arid to semi-arid environment conditions. Keeping in view the above-mentioned scenario, the present study was conducted to evaluate different existing EENFs for N emissions and leaching losses, and then further investigate the effect of these EENFs along with organic amendments on N losses in a rice-wheat cropping system for sustainable farming systems. Materials and methods 2.1 Experimental design and crop management In this study, incubation and lysimeter experiments were conducted to evaluate the response of standard/reference and enhanced-efficiency nitrogenous (Urea-N) fertilizers (EENFs) for NH 3 and N 2 O emissions and NO 3 leaching. Different soil, plant, and leachate analyses were conducted and the determination of NH 3 volatilization and N 2 O emissions were also carried out following the procedures given below. The soil used in the incubation study and lysimeter experiments was originally collected from Shahkot, Tehsil Jaranwala, District Faisalabad, Pakistan and filled in the lysimeters to grow rice and wheat crops. The soil was analyzed for different physico-chemical properties (texture, saturation percentage, EC e, pH s , SAR, total soil N and organic carbon) using standard procedures (Page et al ., 1982). The physicochemical properties of the soil as well as compost and biochar are given in Table 1. Table 1. Physico-chemical properties of the soil, compost and biochar used in the experiments Characteristics Soil Compost Biochar pH s 8.26 7.74 6.93 EC e * (dS m -1 ) 3.52 2.91 1.89 CEC ** (cmol c kg -1 ) 16.23 83.0 Total organic carbon (%) 0.51 72.0 33.84 Total nitrogen (g kg -1 ) 0.142 8.94 4.2 SAR *** (mmol L -1 ) ½ 9.13 Saturation Percentage (%) 42 Texture Clay Loam * EC; electrical conductivity, ** CEC; cation exchange capacity, *** SAR; sodium adsorption ratio 2.2 Incubation Study The incubation study was conducted in the Soil and Water Chemistry Laboratory of the Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences (ISES), University of Agriculture, Faisalabad (UAF), Pakistan. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the standard (reference uncoated urea) and eight (08) EENFs (coated-urea fertilizers) for NH 3 and N 2 O emissions under control conditions to shortlist the potential best-performing EENF fertilizer(s) for the upcoming lysimeter experiment. The experiment was conducted in glass jars in which the collected sandy clay loam soil was filled. Soil, prior to filling, was air-dried and ground to pass through a 2 mm sieve. The soil was pre-incubated by filling 100 g air-dried samples in 250 mL wide-mouth glass jars. De-ionized water was added to bring the water-filled pore space (WFPS) to 30% saturation. The jars were tightly closed with a rubber septum for gas sampling. The soil was left in the jar for 21 days (pre-incubation) prior to the start of the experiment with the addition of N fertilizers. After the pre-incubation, the water content in the soil was adjusted to 65 and 100% of WHC (Factor 2). The N-urea fertilizer treatments (Factor 1) employed are given in Table 2. The N-fertilizer treatments comprised two types of uncoated urea and eight (08) coated EENFs i.e., chitosan-based polymer-coated urea, neem-kernels extracted oil (Azadirachtin conc.: 160 ppm) coated urea [neem-coated urea, Fauji Fertilizer Company (FFC) (Pvt) Ltd.], biomaterials-coated urea (developed jointly by FFC and SCME NUST), commercially available urease inhibitor coated urea, commercially available urease + nitrification inhibitor coated urea, zabardast urea, urea coated with zinc oxide/ash and zinc solubilizing microbes (Engro Fertilizer (Pvt) Ltd.), beneficial microbes-coated nutraful urea (Jaffer Brothers (Pvt) Ltd.); and elemental sulfur coated urea (Vital Agri Nutrients (Pvt) Ltd.). The N-fertilizers were added to the soil in the glass jars equivalent to 250 kg N ha -1 along with a control (no fertilizer), and then jars were placed in the incubation chamber. The concentration of NH 3 and N 2 O were determined from the glass jars at 1, 2, 4, 7, 14, and 21 days after the application of N fertilizer treatments. At the termination of the trial, soil was also analyzed for total soil N (Page et al . 1982). Table 2. Details of treatment combinations in incubation and lysimeter experiments. Incubation Experiment Lysimeter Experiment Factor 1 (EENFs) Factor 2 (WHC) Factor 1 (EENFs) Factor 2 (Organic amendment) Control (no fertilizer) 65% Control (no fertilizer) No amendment Standard urea (prilled) 100% Standard urea (uncoated) Compost (1%) Standard urea (granular) Neem-coated urea Biochar (1%) Polymer coated urea Biomaterials-coated urea Neem coated urea Zabardast urea Biomaterials coated urea Nutraful urea Urease inhibitor-coated urea Nitrification + Urease inhibitor coated urea Zabardast urea Nutraful urea Sulfur coated urea 2.3 Lysimeter Experiment Based on the results of the incubation study, the shortlisted EENF products (most efficient in decreasing NH 3 and N 2 O emissions while maximizing total soil N content) were further evaluated in lysimeter experiments under saturated vs aerated soil conditions while simulating rice-wheat cropping system. The experiment was conducted in lysimeters filled with the same soil used in the incubation study. With the help of a rubber band, a wire gauge was properly fixed at the bottom of the lysimeters, made up of polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and 62 cm in length and 26 cm in diameter. To check the clay movement in the leachate from lysimeters, a thin layer of glass wool along with sand was placed over the wire gauze. A specially designed long-neck funnel was used to fill 42 kg of soil in each lysimeter to avoid segregation of soil particles. Rice “basmati-515” and wheat “Akbar-2019” crops were grown in this study. Recommended doses of standard/reference urea (uncoated prilled) and four (04) shortlisted EENFs (Factor 1) along with/without organic amendments (compost, biochar at the rate of 1% on carbon equivalent basis) (Factor 2) were added into the soil of lysimeters. The details of treatment combinations in the lysimeter study are shown in Table 2. The four shortlisted EENFs were neem-coated urea, biomaterials-coated urea, zabardast urea, and nutraful urea along with one standard/reference urea and one control. Standard and EENFs N doses were calculated to be applied at 125 kg N ha -1 to rice. A full dose of P (75 kg ha -1 as P 2 O 5 using single super phosphate (SSP)) and K (60 kg ha -1 as K 2 O using sulfate of potash (SOP)) and 1/3 rd of the recommended dose of N (excluding control treatment) were applied at the time of rice nursery transplanting and remaining in two equal splits; 34 days after transplanting (DAT) and 46 DAT of rice nursery. Six (06) plants per lysimeter were transplanted during the last week of July 2021. Crop was irrigated with canal water (EC = 0.31 dS m -1 , SAR = 0.65 and RSC = Nil) and allowance for 10% leaching requirement was provided. Four leachates were collected and analyzed for NO 3 - concentrations. NH 3 and N 2 O emitted from soil during rice crop were collected by placing air-tight transparent static chambers made up of acrylic sheet over the rice plants and taking samples after 1, 2, 4, 8 and 14 th day of each N application. At physiological maturity, the chlorophyll contents of rice plants were estimated with the help of SPAD-502 chlorophyll meter. Crop was harvested at harvest maturity and crop biomass was recorded and analyzed for plant N contents to calculate total N uptake. Post-rice soil samples were also collected and analyzed for total soil N. After the rice harvest, surface soil in lysimeters was prepared properly through manual hoeing, and wheat was then sown in the same lysimeters. The recommended N, P (as P 2 O 5 ), and K (as K 2 O) were applied at 120, 100 and 60 kg ha -1 using urea (standard and EENFs), SSP and SOP, respectively. All the P and K were applied at the time of sowing along with 1/3 rd of the recommended N dose (excluding control treatment). The remaining N was applied in two equal splits at the tillering and booting stages of wheat. Five plants were maintained in each lysimeter. Crop was irrigated using the same canal water throughout its growth period. Two leachates were collected and analyzed for NO 3 - concentration. The NH 3 and N 2 O samples during wheat crop were collected from static chamber of PVC after 1, 2, 4, 8 and 14 th day of each N application. At physiological maturity, plant chlorophyll contents were estimated with the help of SPAD-502 chlorophyll meter. Wheat crop was harvested at its harvest maturity and crop biomass was recorded and analyzed for N contents to calculate total N uptake. Post-wheat soil samples were collected and analyzed for total soil N. 2.4 Plant Analysis Plant analysis for N content in the grain and straw was performed at the Soil and Water Chemistry Lab, ISES, UAF. The plant samples (grain and straw) were digested following standard methods (Wolf, 1982) using sulfuric acid and hydrogen peroxide. Plant N concentration was then estimated from the digested samples following the Kjeldahl method (Jackson, 1982). 2.5 Analysis of nitrate in leachates Nitrate-N concentration in leachates was determined using the chromotropic acid spectrophotometer method (Hadjidemetriou, 1982). First of all, 2 mL of the leachate sample was pipetted into a 50 mL volumetric flask and 1 mL of 0.1% chromotropic acid solution was added, drop by drop, into the solution without any mixing and it was placed in the cold water for few minutes. Then 7 mL conc. H 2 SO 4 was added to flasks and after that samples were left at room temperature for 45 minutes to cool and also to develop color. The same procedure was repeated for the standard NO 3 - solutions (0, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 50 ppm). The absorbance of standard solutions was recorded after 45 minutes at 430 nm wavelength. A calibration curve was prepared for standard solutions by plotting absorbance against the respective NO 3 -N concentrations and the NO 3 -N concentration in the unknown samples was read from the calibration curve. 2.6 Analysis of NH 3 and N 2 O The volatilized NH 3 emissions from standard and EENFs treatments were measured by placing acid traps (4% boric acid (H 3 BO 3 )) inside the headspace of the glass jars and static chambers installed over lysimeters. In the incubation study, the measurement was taken over a period of 21 days by taking gas samples after 1, 2, 4, 7, 14 and 21 days after the application of N-fertilizer treatments. In lysimeter experiments, the volatilized NH 3 emissions were measured during rice and wheat crops over a period of 14 days at sampling intervals of 1, 2, 4, 7 and 14 days after the application of each dose of N. On every sampling occasion of N 2 O, three gas samples were taken at times t 0 , t 30 , and t 60 (30-minute intervals) with the help of 60 mL polypropylene syringes fitted with three-way stopcocks. The headspace of the glass jar or static chamber was thoroughly mixed prior to gas sampling by pumping several times after inserting a syringe through the rubber septum of glass jars. In order to minimize any effect of diurnal variations in NH 3 and N 2 O emissions during the lysimeter experiment, samples were taken at the same time of day (10 AM–12 PM). The N 2 O gas samples collected were transferred into 20 mL glass vials that were pre-evacuated and samples were kept until analysis. The concentration of N 2 O was measured using a gas chromatograph (GC) fitted with an electron capture detector (Varian Inc., California, USA). Soon after taking the gas samples, acid traps placed (for NH 3 trapping) in the glass jars containing soil were exchanged at the same sampling intervals and NH 3 concentrations were analyzed by titrating the boric acid (trapping NH 3 ) with 0.0051 M H 2 SO 4 . 2.7 Analysis of soil total N Total soil N was determined by the Kjeldahl method of Bremner and Mulvaney (1982). First of all, 0.2 g of finely ground samples of dry soil were digested with concentrated H 2 SO 4 (3 mL) in the presence of a digestion mixture containing CuSO 4 , K 2 SO 4 (1.1 g), and Se for about one hour on a heating mantle. The digest was moved to a distillation flask and distilled in the presence of 10 M NaOH solution. The distillate was collected in 5 mL boric acid-mixed indicator solution and titrated against 0.01 M HCl solution. Total N in soil was calculated using the following formula. 2.8 Calculation of N use efficiencies Agronomic efficiency of nitrogen (AE N ), and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) including nitrogen partial factor productivity (PFP N ), and partial nitrogen balance (PNB) were calculated using the following equations 2.9 Statistical analysis Both incubation and lysimeter experiments were planned in two factorial completely randomized design (CRD) with three replicates. The experimental data obtained were statistically analyzed following two-way factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique and treatment means were compared using Tukey’s HSD test at 5% level of significance (Steel et al ., 1997). MS Excel was used for recording data and formatting tables. Origin Pro was used for graph preparation, while SPSS software was used for statistical analysis. Results 3.1 Incubation Study 3.1.1 Ammonia (NH 3 ) volatilization The effect of N fertilizers and soil moisture contents was highly significant ( p < 0.05) on volatilization of NH 3 in the incubation study (see Fig. 1a). The volatilization of NH 3 increased initially after the application of standard urea; and all the EENFs as well, while NH 3 fluxes were highest during the first week after N application. At 65% water holding capacity (WHC), the cumulative NH 3 volatilization in the soil significantly increased with the application of standard urea (uncoated prilled), however, there was significant (p < 0.05) decrease in the volatilization of the NH 3 with the application of all EENFs in the treatments under test. Compared to the respective controls, a maximum decrease in NH 3 volatilization was recorded with polymer-coated urea (18.33%) followed by neem-coated urea (15.84%); and minimum (8.01%) with nitrification + urease inhibitor coated urea. NH 3 volatilization significantly ( p < 0.05) increased with the increase in soil moisture contents from 65 to 100% of soil WHC. In this case, NH 3 volatilization remained the highest with the application of standard urea (1.02 mg kg -1 soil day -1 ) and lowest in the control treatment. All EENFs significantly ( p < 0.05) decreased NH 3 volatilization and the maximum decrease was observed with polymer-coated urea (18.35%) which was statistically similar to both nutraful urea (16.76%) and neem-coated urea (15.48%) at 100% WHC. 3.1.2 Nitrous Oxide (N 2 O) emissions The effect of all N fertilizers and both soil moisture contents were also highly significant ( p < 0.05) on the N 2 O emissions during the incubation study (see Fig. 1b). Emissions of N 2 O increased after the application of standard urea and EENFs. At 65% WHC, the cumulative N 2 O emission in the soil was significantly higher with the application of standard urea, however, there was a significant ( p < 0.05) decrease in the emission of N 2 O with the application of all EENFs. Compared to their respective controls, a maximum percentage decrease in the N 2 O emissions was observed with neem-coated urea (16.03%) followed by polymer-coated urea (15.23%); and nutraful urea (15.10%). Moreover, N 2 O emissions significantly increased at higher (100% WHC) soil moisture contents as observed in case of NH 3 volatilization. N 2 O emissions remained the highest with the application of standard urea and lowest in the control treatment. All the tested EENFs significantly decreased N 2 O emissions over the standard fertilizer (uncoated urea) and a maximum decrease was found with the neem-coated urea (18.86%) followed by the Nutraful urea (17.72%). 3.1.3 Soil total N The effect of applied EENFs on total N content in the soil at the end of the incubation study was highly significant ( p < 0.05) in comparison with standard urea (Table 3). There was a significant ( p < 0.05) increase in the soil total N contents (mg kg -1 ) at both moisture levels. At 65% WHC, application of the standard urea increased the total soil N and an increase of 17.42% was observed compared to the control treatment. Application of all EENFs significantly increased soil total N with respect to the standard urea. Neem-coated urea most effectively increased soil total N up to 9.77% over standard urea which was statistically similar to nutraful urea (9.15%). Table 3. Effect of various N fertilizers and soil moisture contents on soil total N (mg kg -1 ) after incubation study. Treatments Soil Total N (mg kg -1 ) 65% WHC 100% WHC Control 132 p * 131 p Standard Urea (Prilled) 155 n 153 o Standard Urea (Granular) 162 jk 158 m Polymer Coated Urea 172 a 168 b-f Neem Coated Urea 170 bc 167 c-g Biomaterials-coated Urea 169 b-d 166 e-i Urease Inhibitor Coated Urea 166 f-i 161 lm Nitrification + Urease Inhibitor Coated Urea 165 h-j 160 kl Zabardast Urea 168 b-e 165 g-i Nutraful Urea 170 ab 167 d-h Sulfur Coated Urea 167 c-g 164 ij * Letters show statistical significance among respective parameters 3.2 Lysimeter Experiments 3.2.1 Nitrate (NO 3 ) leaching during rice crop The effect of amendments (i.e., compost and biochar) and N fertilizers application (i.e., standard urea (uncoated prilled urea) and EENFs) on NO 3 leaching during rice growth is given in Fig. 2a. Without amendment, the highest NO 3 - leaching (58.27 mg L -1 per 4 leachates) was recorded with uncoated standard urea and minimum with control in unamended soil. The application of EENFs significantly decreased the concentration of NO 3 - in leachates. In unamended soil, a maximum decrease (10.34%) over standard urea was observed with neem-coated urea followed by nutraful urea (8.98%), zabardast urea (5.61%); and minimum with biomaterials-coated urea (4.71%). The application of compost in all N fertilizer treatments significantly increased NO 3 - leaching losses over their respective treatments in unamended soil, however maximum increase (16.25%) was observed with the addition of compost in uncoated standard urea. The increase with the addition of compost was comparatively less in EENFs treatments. The application of biochar along with EENFs significantly minimized NO 3 - leaching losses over their respective treatments in unamended soil and greater decreases were recorded with biochar + EENFs. Biochar-treated neem-coated urea decreased NO 3 - leaching (23.53%) most effectively over unamended standard urea followed by nutraful urea (22.01%), and zabardast urea (18.72%). 3.2.2 Nitrate leaching during wheat crop The effect of amendments and N application on NO 3 - during wheat growth is also given in Fig. 2b. Highest NO 3 - (109 mg L -1 per 2 leachates) was recorded with uncoated standard urea (prilled) and minimum with control in unamended soil. EENFs significantly reduced the NO 3 - concentration in leachates. A maximum decrease (8.40%) over standard urea was observed with nutraful urea followed by neem-coated urea (7.69%) and zabardast urea (6.15%). Similar to rice crop, the application of compost increased NO 3 - leaching losses, but the effect of compost was relatively less as observed during rice crop. The addition of biochar along with EENFs significantly minimized NO 3 - losses over their respective treatments in unamended soil and a larger decrease were recorded with biochar + EENFs. Percent decrease with biochar amendment over uncoated standard urea remained the highest in neem-coated urea (14.55%) followed by nutraful urea (14.09%), zabardast urea (11.27%) and biomaterials-coated urea (8.87%). 3.2.3 Ammonia (NH 3 ) volatilization during growth of rice crop Ammonia volatilization also significantly increased with the application of standard urea over control treatment (Fig. 3a). Meanwhile, all EENFs significantly decreased NH 3 losses compared to the standard urea (uncoated prilled urea). Among these, neem-coated urea significantly reduced NH 3 volatilization over standard urea with a maximum reduction of 15.36%, it was followed by the nutraful urea (13.68%). The application of compost with all N fertilizers treatments significantly enhanced NH 3 losses over their respective treatments in unamended soil. A higher increase was observed in uncoated standard urea (31.62%) as compared to all EENFs. The application of biochar significantly reduced NH 3 losses over their respective treatment in the unamended soil. Biochar appeared to be more effective in reducing NH 3 volatilization losses with all EENFs as compared to standard uncoated urea. Under the combination of EENFs with biochar amendment, the percentage decrease in NH 3 volatilization over unamended standard urea remained the highest with neem-coated urea (26.16%) followed by nutraful urea (24.66%) which was statistically similar to biomaterials-coated urea (21.78 %) and zabardast urea (20.17%). 3.2.4 Ammonia volatilization during growth of wheat crop Similar to rice, the effect of N fertilizer treatments and amendments was also significant ( p < 0.05) on NH 3 volatilization during wheat crop (Fig. 3b). The maximum volatilization of NH 3 (16.55 kg ha -1 ) was found in case of standard urea application and all EENFs significantly decreased the NH 3 losses compared to the standard urea. The highest reduction in NH 3 volatilization (over standard urea) was recorded in case of neem-coated urea (13.80%) which differed non-statistically from nutraful urea (13.17%). As observed during the rice crop, compost addition resulted in higher volatilization losses of 34.95, 32.26, 28.80, 27.20, and 26.31% with standard urea, biomaterials-coated urea, zabardast urea, nutraful urea, and neem-coated urea compared to their respective treatments in unamended soil. Moreover, the application of biochar significantly decreased NH 3 losses over their respective treatment in the unamended soil, although a greater decrease was recorded with the biochar + EENFs combination. The decrease in NH 3 volatilization compared to unamended standard urea in biochar-amended treatments remained highest for neem-coated urea (28.57%), which differed non-statistically from biomaterials-coated urea (26.65%), followed by nutraful urea (25.31%) and the lowest for zabardast urea (23.98%). 3.2.5 Nitrous oxide (N 2 O) emissions during growth of rice crop The effect of organic amendments and N fertilizers application on N 2 O emission during rice growth was significant ( p < 0.05). In unamended soil, the highest cumulative N 2 O emission (1.11 kg ha -1 ) was recorded with uncoated standard urea, and all EENFs significantly reduced the N 2 O emission as compared to uncoated standard urea from the soil in the rice system (Fig. 4a). Maximum decrease in N 2 O emission was observed with the nutraful urea (12.3%) followed by neem-coated urea (11.4%), however, all the EENFs were non-significant among each other. Similar to NH 3 volatilization, compost addition along with EENFs enhanced N 2 O losses over their respective treatments in unamended soil and a greater increase as recorded with compost + uncoated standard urea combination. Biochar application along with uncoated standard urea and EENFs minimized N 2 O losses over their respective treatments in unamended soil and greater decrease were recorded with biochar + EENFs combination. Although the decrease in biochar amendment remained the highest (26.1%) in the lysimeter fertilized with nutraful urea followed by neem-coated urea (24.2%) but all the EENFs remained non-significant with each other. 3.2.6 N 2 O emissions during growth of wheat crop The highest N 2 O emissions were recorded with standard urea and minimum with control in unamended soil. The application of all EENFs significantly decreased N 2 O emissions over the standard urea (Fig. 4b). In unamended soil, a maximum decrease (15.27%) over standard urea was observed with the neem-coated urea followed by nutraful urea (12.9%), zabardast urea (9.7%) and biomaterials-coated urea. Emission losses of N 2 O during wheat crop grown in compost-treated soil significantly ( p < 0.05) increased compared to their respective treatments in the unamended soil and greater increase (29.80%) was recorded with the fertilization of uncoated standard urea. Biochar amendments along with uncoated standard urea and all EENFs induced significant ( p < 0.05) decrease in N 2 O losses over their respective treatments in the unamended soil and greater decrease were recorded with biochar + EENFs. Biochar + neem-coated urea decreased N 2 O emission most effectively (28.04%) over unamended standard urea followed by nutraful urea (24.57%), biomaterials-coated urea (22.47%) and zabardast urea (20.5%). 3.2.7 Impact on paddy and straw yield of rice The effect of N-fertilizer treatments and soil organic amendments was significant ( p < 0.05) on paddy and straw yield of rice (Fig. 5). The highest paddy yield (23.56 g lysimeter -1 ) was recorded with neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful (23.37 g lysimeter -1 ) and the lowest (19.19 g lysimeter -1 ) from the control treatment in unamended soil. The application of compost and biochar along with all EENFs significantly increased paddy yield over their respective treatments in unamended soil although a greater increase was recorded with biochar + EENFs. Biochar-amended neem-coated urea most effectively increased (17.39%) paddy yield over unamended standard urea followed by nutraful urea (14.92%), and a minimum with the control. Similarly, application of biochar amendment also enhanced the straw yield and the maximum increase (16.96%) was recorded in neem-coated urea followed by nutraful urea (15.22%), biomaterial-coated urea (14.10%), zabardast urea (10.71%) and a minimum in the control. 3.2.8 Impact on grain and straw yield of wheat Grain and straw yield of wheat also significantly increased with the application of EENFs compared to the standard urea and control treatments in the unamended soil (Fig. 5). In unamended soil, the highest grain yield (31.10 g lysimeter -1 ) was recorded with neem-coated urea followed by nutraful urea (30.52 g lysimeter -1 ) and the lowest (25.61 g lysimeter -1 ) from control of unamended soil. It was found that neem-coated urea produced the highest straw yield (47.12 g lysimeter -1 ) followed by nutraful urea (46.46 g lysimeter -1 ), and the lowest (39.96 g lysimeter -1 ) from control of unamended soil. Compost and biochar along with EENFs further showed a significant increase in grain and straw yield of wheat over their respective treatments in unamended soil. While the highest increase was observed with biochar + EENFs combinations. Biochar amended neem-coated urea enhanced grain yield most efficiently (18.29%) compared to unamended standard urea, followed by nutraful urea (15.33%). Similarly, biochar-amended neem-coated urea also performed better than unamended standard urea in terms of increasing straw yield (14.12%), followed by nutraful urea (11.71%) and zabardast urea (11.31%). Whereas, the minimum grain and straw yield was recorded with the control. 3.2.9 Impact on SPAD chlorophyll values in plants The SPAD chlorophyll values in both crops were significantly increased with the application of EENFs compared to standard urea. The SPAD chlorophyll in rice and wheat were 16.48% and 20.03% higher with neem-coated urea than standard urea in unamended soil, respectively (Fig. 6). Application of compost and biochar, in combination with EENFs fertilizers, significantly increased the SPAD chlorophyll values. However, a maximum increase in SPAD chlorophyll (23.39%) was observed with biochar amendment with nutraful urea in rice crop. In wheat crop, biochar amendment also proved to be more effective in increasing the SPAD chlorophyll contents than compost and a maximum increase (24.93%) was observed with zabardast urea which differed non-significantly from the neem-coated urea (24.63%). 3.2.10 Nitrogen concentration in crops Nitrogen concentration (%) in the paddy and straw of rice plants fertilized with standard urea (uncoated prilled) and different EENFs remained significant ( p < 0.05) (see Table 4). The EENFs showed a significant ( p < 0.05) influence on N concentration over standard urea by enhancing N concentration in rice paddy and straw. Plant N assimilation remained the highest in paddy and straw (1.32 and 0.83%) with neem-coated urea, followed by the nutraful urea (1.29 and 0.82%), and a minimum in the control treatment. There was an increase of 9.42 and 11.16% in N concentration with neem-coated urea over the standard urea in paddy and straw of rice plants grown in unamended soil. Biochar and compost amendments significantly increased N tissue concentration over their respective treatments in unamended soils. Biochar + EENFs were found to be better in increasing N concentration and there was an increase of 15.79 and 17.86% in paddy and straw of rice plants with neem-coated urea, respectively. Similarly, all EENFs significantly ( p < 0.05) increased N concentration in grain and straw of wheat over the standard (uncoated prilled) urea (Table 5). Neem-coated urea improved N concentration in wheat grain and straw by up to 12.67% and 15.51% more than standard urea, respectively. Among biochar and compost amendments, biochar was proved to be most effective in increasing grain and straw N concentrations in wheat plants. Biochar amended neem-coated urea induced 22.04 and 20.41 % more N in grain and straw of wheat, respectively than that of the standard urea in unamended soil. 3.2.11 Agronomic N Use Efficiency (AE N ) Agronomic N Use Efficiency (AE N ) was the highest (8.49 kg kg -1 ) with the neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful urea (8.24 kg kg -1 ) while the lowest with the standard urea (5.62 kg kg -1 ) in the rice crop without any amendment. The application of both the amendments (i.e., biochar and compost) increased the AE N in rice compared to their respective treatments in unamended control. The AE N remained the highest with biochar amendment as compared to the compost-amended treatments. The highest AE N (10.00 kg kg -1 ) was recorded with neem-coated urea followed by nutraful urea (9.29 kg kg -1 ), biomaterials-coated urea (8.68 kg kg -1 ), zabardast urea (8.35 kg kg -1 ) while the lowest was recorded with the uncoated standard urea (6.40 kg kg -1 ) (Table 6). Table 4. Effect of N fertilizers and organic amendments on N content (%) in paddy and straw of rice crop Treatments Paddy Straw No Amendment Compost Biochar No Amendment Compost Biochar Control 0.35±0.009 j * 0.41±0.015 i 0.44±0.021 i 0.24±0.003 h 0.29±0.018 g 0.30±0.009g Standard Urea 1.20±0.015 h 1.25±0.026 g 1.26±0.003 fg 0.75±0.020 f 0.76±0.003 ef 0.78±0.009e Neem-coated Urea 1.31±0.019 c-e 1.36±0.015 ab 1.39±0.007 a 0.83±0.006 c 0.87±0.009 a 0.88±0.006a Biomaterials-coated Urea 1.28±0.003 e-g 1.32±0.009 cd 1.34±0.006 bc 0.81±0.007 cd 0.82±0.009 cd 0.84±0.012bc Zabardast urea 1.27±0.012 fg 1.31±0.013 c-e 1.32±0.018 cd 0.80±0.018 d 0.83±0.003 cd 0.83±0.019c Nutraful Urea 1.29±0.007 d-f 1.34±0.012 bc 1.37±0.015 ab 0.82±0.003 cd 0.86±0.006 ab 0.88±0.008a * Different letters show statistically significant differences (P≤0.05) among treatment means of the respective parameter Table 5. Effect of N fertilizers and organic amendments on N content (%) in grain and straw of wheat crop Treatments Grain Straw No Amendment Compost Biochar No Amendment Compost Biochar Control 0.42±0.006 j * 0.52±0.026 i 0.56±0.032 i 0.28±0.017 h 0.36±0.009 h 0.38±0.009g Standard Urea 1.21±0.029 h 1.29±0.017 g 1.31±0.012 e-g 0.82±0.020 g 0.86±0.012 fg 0.89±0.012ef Neem-coated Urea 1.36±0.012 de 1.47±0.016 ab 1.48±0.018 a 0.94±0.009 a-d 0.97±0.010 a-c 0.98±0.009a Biomaterials-coated Urea 1.35±0.018 df 1.42±0.026 bc 1.46±0.006 ab 0.93±0.029 b-d 0.96±0.015 a-c 0.96±0.008a-c Zabardast urea 1.31±0.009 fg 1.36±0.020 de 1.38±0.015 cd 0.90±0.012 df 0.93± 0.022 b-d 0.94±0.026a-d Nutraful Urea 1.33±0.009 e-g 1.43±0.012 a-c 1.43±0.009 a-c 0.93±0.006 c-e 0.97±0.020 a-c 0.98±0.018ab * Different letters show statistically significant differences (P≤0.05) among treatment means of the respective parameter Table 6. Effect of N fertilizers and organic amendments on AE N , PFP N, and PNB of rice and wheat and post-harvest total soil N Treatments Amendment Rice Wheat * AE N PFP N PNB Soil Total N (post-rice) AE N PFP N PNB Soil Total N (post-wheat) Control - - - 124 k - - - 114 l Standard Urea (uncoated) No Amendment 5.62 h ** 28.55 k 0.34 i 151 i 8.63 i 40.03 i 0.48 i 157 j Neem-coated Urea 8.49 cd 31.41 ef 0.41 ef 167 ef 11.80 c-f 43.20 fg 0.59 f 171 de Biomaterials-coated Urea 7.69 ef 30.61 gh 0.39 g 162 g 10.44 f-h 41.84 h 0.56 g 166 gh Zabardast urea 7.44 f 30.37 hi 0.38 g 161 g 10.22 gh 41.62 h 0.54 gh 167 fg Nutraful Urea 8.24 de 31.16 fg 0.40 f 165 f 10.99 e-g 42.39 gh 0.56 g 170 ef Control - - - 129 j - - - 119 k Standard Urea (uncoated) Compost 6.20 gh 29.65 j 0.37 h 155 h 9.08 hi 41.62 h 0.54 h 161 i Neem-coated Urea 9.24 b 32.68 b 0.44 bc 172 a-c 12.59 bd 45.13 cd 0.66 b 177 a-c Biomaterials-coated Urea 7.99 d-f 31.44 ef 0.41 ef 167 ef 11.55 d-g 44.09 df 0.63 cd 170 e-g Zabardast urea 8.12 d-f 31.56 d-f 0.41 ef 165 f 11.91 c-e 44.45 de 0.61 ef 172 de Nutraful Urea 9.00 bc 32.45 bc 0.43 bd 171bd 11.37 d-g 43.91 ef 0.63 de 175 b-d Control - - - 129 j - - - 117 kl Standard Urea (uncoated) Biochar 6.40 g 29.92 ij 0.38 gh 158 h 9.29 hi 41.83 h 0.55 gh 163 hi Neem-coated Urea 10.00 a 33.51 a 0.47 a 174 a 14.80 a 47.35 a 0.70 a 179 a Biomaterials-coated Urea 8.68 b-d 32.20 b-d 0.43 cd 169 de 11.79 c-f 44.34 de 0.65 bc 173 de Zabardast urea 8.35 c-e 31.87 c-e 0.42 de 170 c-e 13.07 bc 45.62 bc 0.63 cd 174 cd Nutraful Urea 9.29 b 32.80 b 0.45 b 173 ab 13.62 ab 46.16 b 0.66 b 178 ab * AE N = Nitrogen Agronomic Efficiency (kg kg −1 ); PFP N = Nitrogen Partial Factor Productivity (kg kg −1 ); PNB = Partial Nitrogen Balance (kg kg −1 ) ** Different letters show statistically significant differences (P≤0.05) among treatment means of the respective parameter Moreover, AE N in the wheat crop was relatively higher compared to the rice crop. In unamended soil, AE N was recorded at maximum with neem-coated urea (11.80 kg kg -1 ) followed by the nutraful urea (10.99 kg kg -1 ) and minimum with the standard urea. The decreasing order for AE N in wheat was in the order of neem-coated urea>nutraful urea>biomaterials-coated urea>zabardast urea> standard urea (uncoated). Similar to the rice crop, the AE N increased in wheat for all the treatments with the application of biochar and compost amendments. 3.2.12 N partial factor productivity (PFP N ) of crops N partial factor productivity (PFP N ) was the highest (31.41 kg kg -1 ) with the neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful urea (31.16 kg kg -1 ) and the lowest with the uncoated standard urea (31.16 kg kg -1 ) in the rice crop (Table 5). Application of both amendments (compost and biochar) increased the PFP N in rice compared to their respective treatments in unamended control. The PFP N remained the highest with biochar amendment as compared to compost. The highest PFP N (33.51 kg kg -1 ) was recorded with neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful urea (32.80 kg kg -1 ) with the application of biochar. Like that of the AE N , the PFP N in the wheat crop was also relatively higher compared to the rice crop (Table 5). In unamended soil, PFP N was recorded at maximum with neem-coated urea (43.20 kg kg -1 ) followed by the nutraful urea (42.39 kg kg -1 ) and minimum with the uncoated standard urea (40.03 kg kg-1). Similar to the rice crop, the PFP N increased in all the tested treatments with the application of biochar and compost amendments. The decreasing order for PFP N remained as neem-coated urea>nutraful urea>biomaterials-coated urea>zabardast urea> standard uncoated urea. 3.2.13 Partial N balance (PNB) The partial N balance (PNB) was recorded as the highest (0.41) with the neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful urea (0.40). Application of both the amendments (compost and biochar) increased PNB in rice compared to their respective treatments in uncoated prilled urea. The PNB values remained the highest with biochar amendment compared to the compost. The highest PNB (0.47) was recorded with neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful urea (0.45), and biomaterials-coated urea (0.43) (see Table 5). Like that of PFP, the PNB in wheat was relatively higher compared to the rice crop. In uncoated urea applied treatments, the PNB was recorded maximum with neem-coated urea (0.59) followed by the biomaterials-coated urea (0.56) and nutraful urea (0.56). Similar to the rice crop, it increased in all the tested treatments with the application of biochar and compost amendments. The decreasing order remained as neem-coated urea >nutraful urea > biomaterials-coated urea >zabardast urea > standard uncoated urea. 3.2.14 Total soil N (mg kg -1 ) The effect of N fertilizers (standard and EENFs) on the total N content of the soil after rice crop was significant ( p < 0.05) in unamended soil and total N in soil increased in all treatments of EENFs over standard urea in unamended soil. A maximum increase in total N was recorded with neem-coated urea (10.60%) over standard urea which was statistically as par with nutraful urea (9.27%) and minimum with biomaterials-coated urea (6.62%). The addition of compost and biochar amendments to all treatments significantly increased the total soil N. A maximum increase was recorded with neem-coated urea (15.23%) followed by nutraful urea (14.57%) and a minimum with biomaterials-coated urea (11.92%) in biochar-amended soil. Post-wheat analysis revealed that the total N of soil increased from that of post-rice crop with significant treatment differences. DISCUSSION 4.1 Incubation experiment There was a higher volatilization of NH 3 at 100% WHC of the soil in comparison to the 65% WHC soil conditions. Soil moisture has a significant effect in defining the ultimate fate of applied N fertilizers. There is an increased rate of hydrolysis in wet soil and resultantly NH 3 volatilization increases as the rate of hydrolysis is increased (Sigurdarson et al ., 2018). In actuality, N losses are increased due to the extended contact of urea fertilizer particles with wet soil as the urea itself is highly hygroscopic. The urea dissolves with increasing moisture and can be lost through the process of volatilization due to a significant increase in the rate of hydrolysis soon after its application (Drame et al ., 2023). It was also found previously that NH 4 + -N concentration in soil water increased significantly after urea application in soils, which is potentially very susceptible to NH 3 volatilization (Lee et al ., 2021). However, we have found that NH 3 volatilization decreased with the application of EENFs compared to uncoated urea in this study. Neem oil combinations or other coatings of urea fertilizer granules reduced the N release rate and ultimately decreased its losses through volatilization (Ghafoor et al ., 2021; Manzoor et al ., 2022). The effect of soil water content on the emissions of N 2 O was also highly significant ( p < 0.05) in our study. In fact, the N 2 O emissions (N losses) increased with the increase in soil water content, i.e., from 65% to 100% WHC which is in agreement with Clough et al . (2004). Generally, denitrification increases as water content in the soil increases and resultantly there are more emissions of N 2 O (Shaaban et al ., 2018). In our study, higher emissions of N 2 O were linked to the highest (100%) WHC of the soil, suggesting that the majority of the losses were a result of the denitrification process (i.e., in the absence of sufficient oxygen within the soil environment under flooded conditions that mimic wetland rice cultivation practice). Net N 2 O emissions begin to rise significantly when the soil WHC ≥ 80% because soil pores are filled with water in heavily moist, and they hinder the diffusion of O 2 from the atmosphere into the soil. Therefore, soil O 2 concentration decreases, creating hypoxic or anoxic conditions that are favorable for denitrifying bacteria, and consequently, the denitrification process is enhanced (Cocco et al., 2018; Grzyb et al., 2021). Higher soil moisture levels can enhance the availability of NO 3 -N (the substrate for denitrification), improve soil microbial activity (including denitrifying bacteria) and increase the availability of dissolved organic carbon (an energy source for denitrifying bacteria), thereby boosting the denitrification process of N 2 O emissions (Liu et al., 2022). The emissions of N 2 O were also found to be decreased with the application of all coated urea fertilizers (EENFs). Neem oil coating and/or other coatings of urea fertilizer granule reduced the urea-N release rate and ultimately decreased its losses through emissions (Lyu et al ., 2021). Many of the meliacins identified in neem oil (mainly azadirachtin, nimbin, and salannin) coated urea fertilizer have already been reported to inhibit nitrification potential ranging from 4 to 31% in soil incubation studies (Kumar et al., 2007). In this incubation study, neem-coated, polymer-coated and nutraful urea were found the best fertilizers among all tested EENFs in decreasing NH 3 and N 2 O emissions while maximizing total N content in soils. These four shortlisted EENFs were further evaluated in lysimeter study. 4.2 Lysimeter experiments Further in this study, lysimeter experiments showed that NO 3 -N leaching decreased with the application of EENFs confirming that such value-added urea fertilizer products can decrease groundwater pollution and increase the NUE through a slow release of N to maintain optimum yield (Rathnappriya et al ., 2022). Due to the hydrophobic nature and the antimicrobial properties of neem oil, neem-coated urea was slowly dissolved in soil solution and gradually mineralized by soil microbes (Singh, 2016). The decreased leaching might be due to the delayed conversion of ammonical N to nitrite (NO₂⁻) form, thereby improving and prolonging the continuous availability of N to the rice and wheat crops. The application of biochar further decreased the NO 3 -leaching in soil during rice and wheat crops. In particular, the biochar amendment greatly decreased the N leaching losses and enhanced the uptake of N in our study. This might be due to the reason that biochar has a higher ion exchange capacity, adsorption ability and WHC (Basso et al ., 2013; Das, 2024). Our results seem to be in agreement with previous studies in which incorporation of biochar in soil reduced N losses through leaching owing to its WHC and N ions adsorption (Kameyama et al ., 2012; Tian et al ., 2017). The volatilization of the NH 3 also decreased with the application of EENFs in the lysimeter experiments. Neem oil coating and other coatings of urea fertilizer reduced the urea-N release rate and ultimately decreased its losses through volatilization (Nash et al ., 2015; Liu et al ., 2020). A significant decrease in the volatilization of NH 3 was recorded with biochar incorporation which was due to its higher sorption capacity, highly porous structure and surface area. Biochar might have reduced the volatilization of NH 3 due to its acidic functional groups that can absorb NH 4 + -N (Ramalingappa et al ., 2023; Tangarajan et al ., 2018; Agyarko-Mintah et al ., 2017). However, despite its well-demonstrated environment-related research benefits, the commercial-scale availability of biochar to farmers and growers at an economical price remains a challenge. Similarly, the emissions of N 2 O also decreased with the application of EENFs in both tested crops (rice and wheat) in our study. Neem oil combinations and other coatings of urea fertilizer reduced the urea-N release rate, decreased its losses through emissions, and stabilized it for efficient utilization because N is gradually hydrolyzed and later on nitrified/de-nitrified in the soil environment. It has been investigated that enhanced efficiency fertilizer application can help decrease residual soil N by matching the supply of N with that of the plant N demand, and ultimately decreases the available N within the soil environment for onward N 2 O production/emission (Lyu et al ., 2021; Manzoor et al . 2021). The tested EENFs along with the biochar further decreased the emissions of N 2 O in rice and wheat crops in both soil environments. A further decrease in N 2 O was observed in our study with the application of biochar + EENFs which could be due to the reason that it might have resulted in lower NO 3 − contents and higher NH 4 + concentrations after the addition of N fertilizer thereby affecting soil N availability (Dawar et al ., 2021). The adsorption of soil NH 4 + by biochar reduced N 2 O emissions (Sharma, 2018). Furthermore, an increase in crop productivity with the application of biochar decreased the essential crop nutrient(s) losses (Khan et al ., 2024; He et al ., 2018). The organic amendments coupled with N-fertilizers significantly enhance the soil microbial population that regulates N availability, increases fertilizer efficiencies, and minimizes environmental impacts such as gaseous emissions and NO 3 − leaching (Cocco et al., 2018). Soil microorganisms decompose organic fertilizers by releasing NH₄⁺ for plant uptake while stabilizing N in the soil. Microbes temporarily incorporate available N into their biomass, preventing N losses through leaching or volatilization, and then make it available to plants later upon microbial turnover. Nitrification and denitrification are known to be the main pathways of N 2 O production and are controlled by the enzymatic activities of soil microbes. Nitrifying bacteria like Nitrosomonas and Nitrobacter oxidize NH₄⁺ to NO₂⁻ and NO₃⁻, while denitrifying bacteria (e.g., Pseudomonas and Paracoccus ) further reduce NO₃⁻ and NO₂⁻ to gaseous N₂O, releasing N into the atmosphere (Grzyb et al., 2021). The grain and straw yield of rice and wheat also registered an increase with the application of standard urea (uncoated prilled) over control treatment where no N was applied. However, the application of EENFs further improved the yield of both crops over standard uncoated urea. An increase in grain and straw yield with the application of EENFs resulted from the increased NUE of these fertilizers compared to the standard urea. There were fewer N losses with EENFs in the form of NH 3 , N 2 O emissions, and NO 3 - leaching that enhanced the NUE in rice and wheat and ultimately, the yield of these crops. Maximum N availability to rice and wheat during the growth period with these EENFs, increased the root and shoot growth and chlorophyll content that resulted in increased biomass and ultimately higher plant height and productive tillers in our experiment (data not presented). More biomass production is an indication of higher yield, and in this work, EENFs helped in boosting the biomass production of rice and wheat crops compared to the standard urea. EENFs such as neem-coated urea induced slower transformation of urea-N into plant-available forms because of the presence of Azadirachtin in comparison to the standard (uncoated) urea thus decreasing its potential losses (Khandey et al ., 2017). All EENFs, including neem-coated urea, also decreased the availability of NO 3 – to denitrifying bacteria, thereby enhancing N efficiency which led to an increase in grain and biomass yields of rice and wheat (Timilsina et al., 2023; Kundu et al ., 2013). Biochar application along with the EENFs further improved the yield of rice and wheat. The introduction of biochar amendment further decreased the N losses in the form of NH 3 and N 2 O, thus increasing the N availability. In literature, higher retention of mineral N in NH 4 + form rather than NO 3 – has been reported for several days, after the application of urea, which might have enhanced the uptake of N leading to increased crop yield. Higher availability of NH 4 + increased crop yield and nutrition as relatively less energy is required by the crop to absorb NH 4 + compared to the NO 3 - (Dawar et al ., 2021). Better grain and straw yields of rice and wheat might also be due to the increased WHC of soil and organic matter thereby, retaining moisture to a reasonable level during the wheat crop, ultimately increasing the grain yields. As reported elsewhere, biochar incorporation could efficiently increase total N concentration, enhancing the availability of N by decreasing N losses (NH 3 and N 2 O) from the soil and bringing economic benefits due to increased NUE (Niu et al ., 2018). On the contrary, we found that compost application alone or along with all EENFs significantly enhanced NH 3 and N 2 O emissions over their respective controls. A higher increase was observed in uncoated standard urea compared to other EENFs. It is commonly known that adding compost or manures to the soil can increase the activity of urease enzymes, which hydrolyze urea molecules into NH 3 molecules from inorganic fertilizers, supplying labile N sources into the soil (Lee et al ., 2021). Similarly, Sigurdarson et al . (2018) suggested that high urease activity is linked with increased NH 3 volatilization and N 2 O emissions when urea fertilizer is applied with compost or manure, possibly increasing urea hydrolysis in soils. Our results also indicate that compost application enhances urea hydrolyzation in soils, which might facilitate the liberation of NH 3 resulting in increased NH 3 volatilization during rice cultivation. Therefore, compost amendment significantly increases NH 3 volatilization in soils, which should be considered as the main regulating factor when applying compost in the field. EENFs significantly increased N contents in rice and wheat crop plants compared to the standard (uncoated) urea. This might be due to the decreased losses of N in the form of NH 3 , N 2 O, and NO 3 - after the application of these EENFs (hence increased soil enrichment) that ultimately enhanced N uptake in rice and wheat. The increase in the percent N contents in plant parts with EENFs application might also be due to higher availability of N in the rhizosphere, hence decreased N losses in this study. Higher uptake of N has also been recorded elsewhere with the application of slow-release N fertilizers (Folina et al ., 2021). Application of biochar further improved the N content in rice and wheat due to the reason that biochar might have further decreased the N losses in the form of NH 3 and N 2 O, thus increasing the N availability. EENFs offer a significant boost to agronomic efficiency of N (AE N ), N partial factor productivity (PFP N ), and partial nitrogen balance (PNB) due to their innovative formulations and the nature of coating materials that encapsulate urea-N. These fertilizers mitigated N losses through volatilization, leaching, and denitrification, thereby maximizing nutrient uptake by both crops and minimizing environmental impacts. By incorporating inhibitors or other coating materials that regulate N release (as in neem-coated urea and other EENF sources used), EENFs synchronize nutrient availability with crop demand, leading to improved utilization rates and reduced application frequencies. Moreover, their targeted delivery systems ensured that N is efficiently utilized by both crops, promoting healthier growth and higher yields in the present study. The adoption of EENFs thus represents a pivotal step towards sustainable agriculture, as it not only enhances productivity but also minimizes N pollution, safeguarding both agricultural livelihoods and environmental integrity. The total soil N increased after rice and wheat crop and there was a greater increase in soil total N contents in EENFs compared to the standard urea. An increase in soil total N could be due to the reason that there were lesser N losses in the form of NH 3 volatilization, N 2 O emission and NO 3 - as reflected in the result of our study. The NUE of the EENFs remained the highest compared to the standard urea (Nishimura et al ., 2022). The total concentration of N in soil increased due to the availability of N for a longer period of time by using EENFs (Wang et al ., 2024). An earlier experiment found that slow-release N fertilizers increased total soil N when applied at an equal level in comparison with standard urea (Zheng et al . 2016). Our results are also in agreement with Gangurde et al . (2018) who found that coated N fertilizer application increased soil N (188.40 kg ha -1 ) contents significantly. Our findings are in line with Ali et al . (2007) who observed that neem-coated urea decreased N losses and improved total soil N. This synergistic approach of combining EENFs with biochar can significantly enhance soil fertility by improving nutrient retention, reducing N emission and leaching losses, and leading to more efficient nutrient use. It can also increase crop yields while minimizing the environmental impact associated with excessive fertilizer application in the context of sustainable agriculture. Additionally, biochar's ability to improve soil structure and water retention complements the gradual nutrient release, promoting healthier soils and plant growth. Consequently, the application of EENFs coupled biochar should be an innovative and effective approach to mitigate N emissions from agriculture. This approach supports sustainable farming practices by enhancing soil health, reducing input costs, and mitigating environmental pollution. Conclusions Different types of enhanced efficiency nitrogenous fertilizers (EENFs) significantly decreased the N losses in the forms of NH 3 and N 2 O in comparison with the standard uncoated urea in our incubation study. All the shortlisted EENFs (from the incubation study) also proved their worth through decreased N losses during rice and wheat growth in the lysimeter study. Compared to the standard (uncoated prilled) urea, all the tested EENFs decreased the NH 3 , N 2 O, and NO 3 - losses, and increased NUEs (agronomic efficiency; nitrogen partial factor productivity; and partial nitrogen balance) alongside increasing the yield of rice and wheat. Neem-coated urea proved to be the best EENF among the tested products. Biochar incorporation with EENFs fertilizers further improved the NUE, decreased N losses, and enhanced crop yields. In our assessment, the tested biochar amendment induced further growth and enhanced yield attributes compared to the compost amendment. In summary, the use of commercially available EENFs could help in reducing the N losses (through less leaching and reduced GHG emissions) as per the commitment made by the countries during the Colombo Declaration wherein they agreed to halve N waste by 2030. Declarations Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Data availability The data used in this research article will be provided upon request. Acknowledgment This research work was supported by the Higher Education Commission, Pakistan (HEC-NRPU 20-11523). References Aasmi, A. L. et al . Impacts of slow-release nitrogen fertilizer rates on the morpho-physiological traits, yield, and nitrogen use efficiency of rice under different water regimes. Agriculture . 12 , 86; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12010086 (2022). Agyarko-Mintah, E. et al . Biochar lowers ammonia emission and improves nitrogen retention in poultry litter composting. Waste Manag . 61 , 129-137 (2017). Albahri, G. et al . Enhancing essential grains yield for sustainable food security and bio-safe agriculture through latest innovative approaches. Agronomy . 13 , 1709; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13071709 (2023). An, H., Owens, J., Beres, B., Li Y. & Hao, X. Nitrous oxide emissions with enhanced efficiency and conventional urea fertilizers in winter wheat. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst . 119 , 307-322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-021-10118-9 (2021). Anas, M. et al . Fate of nitrogen in agriculture and environment: agronomic, eco-physiological and molecular approaches to improve nitrogen use efficiency. Biol Res . 53 , 47; https://doi.org/10.1186/s40659-020-00312-4 (2020). Basso, A. S., Miguez, F. E., Laird, D. A., Horton, R. & Westgate, M. Assessing potential of biochar for increasing water-holding capacity of sandy soils. GCB Bioene . 5 , 132-143 (2013). Beusen, A. H. W., Bouwman, A. F., Heuberger, P. S. C., Van Drecht, G. & Van Der Hoek, K. W. Bottom-up uncertainty estimates of global ammonia emissions from global agricultural production systems. Atmos. Environ . 42 , 6067-6077 (2008). Bordoloi, N., Baruah, K. K. & Hazarika, B. Fertilizer management through coated urea to mitigate greenhouse gas (N 2 O) emission and improve soil quality in agroclimatic zone of Northeast India. Environ Sci Pollut Res . 27 , 11919–11931 (2020). Bouyoucos, G. J. Hydrometer method improved for making particle size analyses of soils. Agron. J . 54 , 464-465 (1962). Cai, G. X., Chen D.L., Ding H., Pacholski A., Fan X. H., Zhu Z. L. 2002. Nitrogen losses from fertilizers applied to maize, wheat and rice in the North China Plain. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems , 63, 187–195. Cassman, K. G. & Dobermann, A. Nitrogen and the future of agriculture: 20 years on. Ambio 51 , 17–24 (2022). Chen, J. et al . Environmentally friendly fertilizers: A review of materials used and their effects on the environment. Sci. Total Environ . 613–614 , 829-839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.186 (2018). Clough, T. J., Kelliher, F. M., Sherlock, R. R. & Ford, C. D. Lime and soil moisture effects on nitrous oxide emissions from a urine patch. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 68 , 1600-1609 (2004). Cocco, E. et al . How shallow water table conditions affect N 2 O emissions and associated microbial abundances under different nitrogen fertilisations. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ . 261 , 1–11 (2018). Crop Prospects and Food Situation. No. 2, April 2009. Rome. FAO. 2009e. Policy responses to higher food prices. Committee on Commodity Problems Das, S. K. Adsorption and desorption capacity of different metals influenced by biomass derived biochar. Environ Syst Res. 13 , https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-024-00335-w (2024). Dawar, K. et al . Biochar and urease inhibitor mitigate NH 3 and N 2 O emissions and improve wheat yield in a urea fertilized alkaline soil. Sci Rep . 11 , 17413; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-96771-0 (2021). Dawar, K. et al. The effect of biochar and nitrogen inhibitor on ammonia and nitrous oxide emissions and wheat productivity. J. Plant Growth Regul. 40 , 2465-2475 (2020). Drame, M. et al . Effects of hotter, drier conditions on gaseous losses from nitrogen fertilisers, J. Environ. Manage . 345 , 118671; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118671 (2023). Folina, A. et al . Evaluation of various nitrogen indices in N-Fertilizers with inhibitors in field crops: A review. Agron. 11 , 418; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11030418 (2021). Ghafoor, I. et al . Slow-release nitrogen fertilizers enhance growth, yield, NUE in wheat crop and reduce nitrogen losses under an arid environment. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res . 28, 43528-43543 (2021). Grzyb, A., Wolna-Maruwka, A., and Niewiadomska, A. 2021. The significance of microbial transformation of nitrogen compounds in the light of integrated crop management. Agronomy, 11(7), 1415; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11071415. Gu, J. and Yang, J. 2022. Nitrogen (N) transformation in paddy rice field: Its effect on N uptake and relation to improved N management. Crop and Environment . 1 , 7-14. Hadjidemetriou, D. G. 1982. Comparative study of the determination of nitrates in calcareous soils by the ion-selective electrode, chromotropic acid and phenoldisulphonic acid methods. Analyst 107 (1270):25–29. Hassan, M. U. et al . Management strategies to mitigate N 2 O emissions in agriculture. Life . 12 , 439; https://doi.org/10.3390/life12030439 (2022). He, T.H. et al . Effects of application of inhibitors and biochar to fertilizer on gaseous nitrogen emissions from an intensively managed wheat field. Sci. Total Environ . 628 , 121-130 (2018). IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. In Working Group, I contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014) https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107415324.023. Jackson, M. Soil Chemical Analysis. Constable and Co. Ltd., London, UK. (1962). Jindo, K. et al. Role of biochar in promoting circular economy in the agriculture sector. Part 1: A review of the biochar roles in soil N, P and K cycles. Chem. Biol. Technol. Agric . 7 , 15; https://doi.org/10.1186/s40538-020-00182-8 (2022). Kameyama, K., Miyamoto, T., Shiono, T. & Shinogi, Y. Influence of sugarcane bagasse-derived biochar application on nitrate leaching in calcaric dark red soil. J. Environ. Qual . 41 , 1131-1137 (2012). Khan, S. et al . Biochar production and characteristics, its impacts on soil health, crop production, and yield enhancement: A review. Plants . 13, 166; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13020166 (2024). Khandey N. S., Anurag, R. N., Sengar, S. S. & Kumar, R. Response of applied neem coated urea (NCU) on yield and yield attributing parameters of rice (Oryza sativa L) in Vertisol. Int. J. Chem. Stud . 5 ,1670–1675 (2017). Kumar, R. et al . Influence of physicochemical parameters of neem ( Azadirachta indica A Juss) oils on nitrification inhibition in soil. J. Agric. Food Chem . 55 , 1389-1393 (2007). Kundu, S. et al . Pine oleoresin: A potential urease inhibitor and coating material for slow-release urea. Curr. Sci . 104 , 1068-1071 (2013). Lee, J., Choi, S., Lee, Y., & Kim, S. Y. (2021). Impact of manure compost amendments on NH3 volatilization in rice paddy ecosystems during cultivation. Environmental Pollution, 288, 117726. Li, Y., Huang, L., Zhang, H., Wang, M. & Z. Liang. Assessment of ammonia volatilization losses and nitrogen utilization during the rice growing season in alkaline salt-affected soils. Sustainability . 9 , 132; https://doi.org/10.3390/su9010132 (2017). Liu, X. et al . Comparing ammonia volatilization between conventional and slow-release nitrogen fertilizers in paddy fields in the Taihu Lake region. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res . 27 , 8386-8394 (2020). Liu, H., Zheng, X., Li, Y., Yu, J., Ding, H., Sveen, T. R., & Zhang, Y. (2022). Soil moisture determines nitrous oxide emission and uptake. Science of the Total Environment, 822, 153566. Lyu, U. et al . Reducing N 2 O emissions with enhanced efficiency nitrogen fertilizers (EENFs) in a high-yielding spring maize system. Environ. Pollut . 273 , 116422; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.116422 (2021). Mahmud, K., Panday, D., Mergoum, A. & Missaoui, A. Nitrogen losses and potential mitigation strategies for a sustainable agroecosystem. Sustainability. 13, 2400 ; https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042400 (2021). Malinas, A. et al . Current status and future prospective for nitrogen use efficiency in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Plants , 11 , 217; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11020217 (2022). Manzoor, S. et al . Biochar and slow-releasing nitrogen fertilizers improved growth, nitrogen use, yield, and fiber quality of cotton under arid climatic conditions. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res . 29 , 13742-13755 (2022). Marín-Martínez, A., Sanz-Cobena, A., Bustamante, M. A., Agullo, E. & Paredes, C. Effect of organic amendment addition on soil properties, greenhouse gas emissions and grape yield in semi-arid vineyard agroecosystems. Agronomy 11, 1477 (2021). Nash, P. R., Nelson, K. A., Motavallid, P. P. & Anderson, S. H. Corn yield response to managed drainage and polymer coated urea. Agron. J . 107 , 435-440 (2015). Niu, Y. et al . Yield-scaled N 2 O emissions were effectively reduced by biochar amendment of sandy loam soil under maize-wheat rotation in the North China Plain. Atmos. Environ . 170, 58-70 (2017). Page, A. L., Miller, R. H. & D.R. Keeney (eds.). Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties. ASA, SSSA, Madison, WI, USA. (1982) Ramalingappa, L. P. et al . Reducing options of ammonia volatilization and improving nitrogen use efficiency via organic and inorganic amendments in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). PeerJ https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14965 (2023). Rathnappriya, R. H. K. et al . Examination of the effectiveness of controlled release fertilizer to balance sugarcane yield and reduce nitrate leaching to groundwater. Agronomy . 12 , 695; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12030695 (2022). Richards, L.A. Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils. USDA Agric. Handbook 60 . Washington, D. C. (1954). Shaaban, M. et al . Reduction in soil N 2 O emissions by pH manipulation and enhanced nosZ gene transcription under different water regimes. Environ. Pollut . 235 , 625-631 (2018). Shahzad, A. N., Qureshi, M. K., Wakeel, A. & Misselbrook, T. H. Crop production in Pakistan and low nitrogen use efficiencies. Nat. Sustain . 2, pp. 1106-1114 (2019). Sigurdarson, J. J., Svane, S., & Karring, H. (2018). The molecular processes of urea hydrolysis in relation to ammonia emissions from agriculture. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology, 17(2), 241-258. Singh, B. Agronomic Benefits of Neem Coated Urea - A Review. Technical Report, Indian Fertilizer Association. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.10647.98722 (2016). Sparks, D. L. et al . Methods of soil analysis: Part 3-chemical methods. Book Series Number 5. Soil Sci. Soc. of Am., Am. Soc. of Agron ; Madison, WI, USA. (1966). Tangarajan, R. et al . The potential value of biochar in the mitigation of gaseous emission of nitrogen. Sci. Total Environ . 612 , 257-268 (2018). Tian, X., Geng, J., Guo, Y., Li, C., Zhang, M. & Chen, J. Controlled-release urea decreased ammonia volatilization and increased nitrogen use efficiency of cotton. J. Plant Nut. Soil Sci . 6 , 667-675 (2017). Timilsina, S., Khanal, A. & Vista, S. P. Effect of neem oil coated and common urea with different nitrogen levels on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) in Kaski, Nepal. TURJFAS . 11 , 1016–1023; https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v11i6.1016-1023.5436 (2023). Wang, C. et al . Biochar-based slow-release of fertilizers for sustainable agriculture: A mini review. Environ. Sci. Ecotechnol . 10 , 100167; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ese.2022.100167 (2022). Wang, F. et al . Nitrogen application timing and levels affect the fate and budget of fertilizer nitrogen in the apple–soil system. Plants 2024, 13 , 813; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13060813 (2024). Whetton, R. L., Harty, M. A. & Holden, N. M. Communicating nitrogen loss mechanisms for improving nitrogen use efficiency management, focused on global wheat. Nitrogen . 3 , 213–246 (2022). Woodley, A. L. et al . Ammonia volatilization, nitrous oxide emissions and corn yields as influenced by nitrogen placement and enhanced efficiency fertilizers. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J . 84 , 1327- 1341 (2020). Yaseen, M. et al . Subsurface-applied coated nitrogen fertilizer enhanced wheat production by improving nutrient-use efficiency with less ammonia volatilization. Agronomy . 11 , 2396; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11122396 (2021). Supplementary Files GraphicalAbstract.docx Highlights.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 26 May, 2025 Read the published version in International Journal of Environmental Research → Version 1 posted Reviewers agreed at journal 16 Dec, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 16 Dec, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 14 Dec, 2024 First submitted to journal 14 Dec, 2024 Editorial decision: Minor revisions 29 Nov, 2024 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4990321","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":390949141,"identity":"669464ba-3e13-4e3f-b218-395e460bbfff","order_by":0,"name":"Ghulam Murtaza","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9955-5887","institution":"University of Agriculture Faisalabad Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ghulam","middleName":"","lastName":"Murtaza","suffix":""},{"id":390949142,"identity":"f5a76d9b-6f58-45a7-8fc6-b6e244b43407","order_by":1,"name":"Tajammal Hussain","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Agriculture Faisalabad Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Tajammal","middleName":"","lastName":"Hussain","suffix":""},{"id":390949143,"identity":"f27babda-4f65-45f6-b4cc-7fd51a380659","order_by":2,"name":"Munir Hussain Zia","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Fauji Fertilizer Company (Pvt.) Ltd, Pakistan","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Munir","middleName":"Hussain","lastName":"Zia","suffix":""},{"id":390949144,"identity":"d159a995-d9f0-4e9e-a26a-aa030ed94218","order_by":3,"name":"Wasim Javed","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3975-5884","institution":"University of Agriculture Faisalabad Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Wasim","middleName":"","lastName":"Javed","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-08-28 10:26:28","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4990321/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4990321/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-025-00801-y","type":"published","date":"2025-05-26T15:57:45+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":71807357,"identity":"674009a8-aef7-4ba7-a781-fe4a64481bf6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-18 17:44:51","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":238119,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eEffect of various N fertilizers and soil moisture contents on NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization (a) and\u0026nbsp; N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emission (b) during the incubation study. Different letters on the bars show statistically significant differences (p≤0.05) among treatment means.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4990321/v1/a72e248f89c767319cdfc058.png"},{"id":71807355,"identity":"79509124-56ac-4183-88d5-1ccaba62a1fb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-18 17:44:51","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":200818,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eEffect of N fertilizers and organic amendments on cumulative nitrate leaching (mg L\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) during rice (a) and wheat (b) crops. L1, L2, L3, and L4 are 1\u003csup\u003est\u003c/sup\u003e, 2\u003csup\u003end\u003c/sup\u003e, 3\u003csup\u003erd,\u003c/sup\u003e and 4\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e leachate, respectively.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4990321/v1/b2f24436f9a9270c7c428ffa.png"},{"id":71808828,"identity":"7c97d399-7a0a-42e5-9e8b-57eae78436d8","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-18 18:00:51","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":161439,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eEffect of N fertilizers and organic amendments on NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e emissions (kg ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) during rice (a) and wheat (b) crops. Different letters on the bars show statistically significant differences (p≤0.05) among treatment means.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4990321/v1/1e19b60ddf7d93c8077566e1.png"},{"id":71807822,"identity":"c75577c0-40c4-46a3-879f-94af17baf723","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-18 17:52:51","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":160798,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eEffect of N fertilizers and organic amendments on N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions (mg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) during rice (a) and wheat (b) crops. Different letters on the bars show statistically significant differences (p≤0.05) among treatment means.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4990321/v1/50db72a11d04435c96622c13.png"},{"id":71807823,"identity":"42a5937c-24f0-4423-a57d-f7bd3f71cb11","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-18 17:52:51","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":170589,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eEffect of N fertilizers and organic amendments on the grain and straw yield (g lysimeter\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) of rice (a) and wheat (b). Different letters on the bars show statistically significant differences (p≤0.05) among treatment means of the respective parameter.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"5.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4990321/v1/9385f983b48f8a5e14a2e568.png"},{"id":71807359,"identity":"8358257b-de90-487f-b50e-88c7be05481f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-18 17:44:51","extension":"png","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":143629,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eEffect of N fertilizers and organic amendments on the SPAD chlorophyll values of rice (a) and wheat (b) crops. Different letters on the bars show statistically significant differences (p≤0.05) among treatment means.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"6.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4990321/v1/66a42f76b1b943710fb618e7.png"},{"id":83783095,"identity":"e3545df0-7bdd-4738-be77-359a19391141","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-06-02 16:10:47","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":2874931,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4990321/v1/e273f1ae-6673-4aa0-b3e1-7dc6a56d8d6e.pdf"},{"id":71807360,"identity":"9376ecae-ff84-4b52-a415-397466bd97f3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-18 17:44:51","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":1406708,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"GraphicalAbstract.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4990321/v1/68a94d18d976e7eb85f0661d.docx"},{"id":71807356,"identity":"9bca2950-d268-4289-868e-733b8c1b4fe0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-12-18 17:44:51","extension":"docx","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":13619,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Highlights.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4990321/v1/4e675b647a7ef97d018723db.docx"}],"financialInterests":"","formattedTitle":"Enhanced-efficiency nitrogenous fertilizers coupled with organic amendments: A sustainable approach to mitigating nitrogen emissions and leaching in rice-wheat cropping systems","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eFood security concerns coupled with the decline in agricultural lands due to massive urbanization and industrialization have demanded productivity enhancement of existing agricultural lands.\u0026nbsp;Increased worldwide population and reduced agricultural lands pose incredible pressures to agricultural production (Wang \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022). By 2050, world agriculture will need to produce 70% more food to feed an additional population of 2.3 billion (FAO, 2009). Increasing global food demand has led to excessive fertilizer application to produce more by intensive cropping in declining land resources (Ghafoor \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021).\u0026nbsp;Balancing these requirements while addressing environmental concerns associated with synthetic fertilizer use (e.g., gaseous\u0026nbsp;emissions, leaching and runoff of nutrients) remains a challenge for global agriculture.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn arid and semi-arid climates like Pakistan, sustainable crop production is threatened due to declining soil fertility and poor organic matter. Feeding the ever-increasing population of the country demands immediate attention to the efficient use of crop inputs, especially fertilizers. Fertilizer usage enormously contributes to satisfying increased crop productivity under intensive cropping systems while simultaneously ensuring food security (Albahri \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2023).\u0026nbsp;The application of synthetic nitrogen (N) fertilizer is a critical aspect of modern extensive cropping systems for crop management and one of the decisive factors in enhancing crop production in arable lands (Yaseen \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDuring the past six decades, there has been a significant increase in the consumption of synthetic N fertilizers to support intensive farming. The nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) is economically important because improper use of this input (including its application in excess of the crop requirement) can result in significant N losses, thereby decreasing NUE, and increasing crop production cost and environmental concerns (Li \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2017). In many countries around the globe, not only the application of N fertilizer is excessive but overall, its efficiency is very low due to various N losses including nitrous oxide (N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO) and ammonia (NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e) emissions along with nitrate (NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e) leaching and runoff (Whetton \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e.,2022; Manzoor \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022). Excessive or improper use of synthetic N fertilizers ultimately leads to environmental concerns, such as air pollution from gaseous emissions, water pollution from leaching and runoff, soil degradation, and ecosystem disruption (Milanas \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022; Anas \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020; Wang \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022). Thus, modern farming practices should focus on responsible and sustainable N fertilizer management to balance the benefits of increased crop yields with environmental conservation.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAgriculture is one of the major sources of greenhouse gases (GHGs) emissions. Gaseous emissions such as nitrogen oxides (NO\u003csub\u003ex\u003c/sub\u003e), N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO, and NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e from agricultural sources adversely affect air quality and account for abundant contributions to climate change (Keneeth \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022; Hassan \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022). There is a huge concern about the undesirable effects linked to the release of N emissions from highly fertilized arable lands. Considerable quantities of N can be lost from the root zone of crops through NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions which can account for up to 30-39% and 0.8-2% of the urea-N applied, respectively (Cai et al., 2002; Woodley \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020). N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO is one of the most significant GHG, having around 298 times greater global-warming potential in comparison to CO\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e (IPCC 2013). The emissions of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003ealso have detrimental impacts on the overall atmosphere since it also acts as a secondary source of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions (Beusen \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2008). For sustainable soil health, economical crop production, and protection of the environment, there is a desperate need to focus on alternate N fertilizer sources, mitigation strategies to diminish N losses, and implement improved fertilizer management practices (Mahmud \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021), as proposed by \u0026ldquo;Colombo Declaration on Sustainable Nitrogen Management\u0026rdquo; by UN Environment Program, with an ambition to halve N waste by 2030.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEnhanced Efficiency Nitrogenous Fertilizers (EENFs) are considered a sustainable solution for decreasing N losses by applying technically innovative approaches for synchronizing crop N demand and N supply (Ghafoor \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021; Manzoor \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022). Nitrogenous fertilizers with environment-friendly coatings composed of various materials increase the diffusion period of fertilizer granules by the slow-releasing mechanisms of N nutrients for plant uptake (Chen \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018; Ghafoor \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2021). These coatings can reduce N losses through nitrification, denitrification, volatilization, and leaching, enhance fertilizer longevity in soils, and improve NUE and N uptake by plants. Coated slow-release N granules in EENFs allow N to gradually and efficiently diffuse into the soil, and nitrification and urease inhibitors (UIs) in EENFs slow down the conversion of urea to NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e, and NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e to NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e, respectively (An \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021). The agronomic and environmental benefits of various types of EENFs have been recently studied. For example, the neem-coated urea (NCU) has been found to increase NUE (and ultimately crop yields) due to its nitrification inhibitor characteristics (Khandey \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. 2017). Bordoloi \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e (2020) also reported N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emission reduction in rice fields with the application of starch-coated and neem-coated urea compared to normal uncoated urea.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRice (\u003cem\u003eOryza sativa\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eL.) and wheat (\u003cem\u003eTriticum aestivum\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eL.) are two main staple foods feeding over 75% of the world\u0026rsquo;s population, so the rice-wheat cropping system in Asia is vital for global food security. The NUE of rice is quite low (only 20\u0026ndash;30%) as a huge quantity of the applied N is lost to the environment in the forms of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO, NH\u003csub\u003e3,\u003c/sub\u003e and NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e, leading to inefficient use of N fertilizers (Gu and Yang, 2022). Applied N in an anaerobic submerged condition in the soil is lost in various forms such as denitrification, leaching, and volatilization, out of which dominant N loss results from the volatilization of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e. The efficiency of N fertilizer in wheat is also low and significant gaseous emissions (as N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO and NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e) have been reported (Dawar \u003cem\u003eet\u0026nbsp;al\u003c/em\u003e. 2020). Therefore, the use of EENFs could be effective in reducing the N losses and enhancing NUE as well as crop yields in rice-wheat rotation (Aasmi \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOf the total N consumption (109.2 million metric tons) consumed worldwide during the year 2021, Asia alone accounted for more than 55% of it (IFASTAT online, see\u0026nbsp;\u003ca href=\"https://www.ifastat.org/databases\"\u003ehttps://www.ifastat.org/databases\u003c/a\u003e). Although Pakistan is among the top four countries in terms of N consumption, it recorded low average yields with the lowest partial N productivity and NUE in wheat, cotton, and rice production. While these three crops account for 75% of the total national N fertilizer consumption in Pakistan compared to that with top producer countries \u003cstrong\u003e(\u003c/strong\u003eShahzad \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2019). \u0026nbsp;Moreover, there is limited published research about these commercially available EENFs regarding their usage efficiency and reactive N emissions. Efforts to enhance NUE in agriculture are ongoing, aiming to maximize the benefits of N fertilizers while minimizing N losses and their negative impacts on the environment and farm economics. Therefore, finding new management practices, alternate fertilizer solutions, and mitigation strategies for gaseous N losses and enhancing fertilizer NUE is immediately needed.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe incorporation of organic manures such as farmyard manure, compost and biochar into soils can improve soil fertility and productivity by providing plant nutrients, enhancing soil properties and microbial activities, thereby reducing the use of synthetic fertilizers. However, the decomposition of organic manures by soil microbes can also lead to increased GHG emissions (Marin-Martinez et al., 2021). The application of organic fertilizers along with synthetic fertilizers could be a promising technique to reduce N losses, enhance the availability of soil N, and thereby increase soil fertility and crop productivity (Zhang, 2022). Through such farming practices, for example, by biochar addition, NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions could be reduced and a higher NUE could be achieved (Jindo \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020). Organic amendments can either increase or decrease N losses in soils by affecting N dynamics, soil microbial population, enzyme activity, and soil carbon pools, thereby altering N availability and uptake for plant growth and productivity (Niu \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018; Sigurdarson \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018; Lee \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021). It is not yet well understood which mechanisms of N transformation from biochar or compost are involved in N cycling in soil and emissions to the atmosphere, and\u0026nbsp;the degree and consistency of these changes are also not well quantified across various crops, soils, and climatic conditions. To the best of our knowledge, no published studies have been performed to compare the effects of various EENFs used in combination with the biochar/organic amendments in order to assess NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions and NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e leaching in rice-wheat cropping systems under arid to semi-arid environment conditions.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eKeeping in view the above-mentioned scenario, the present study was conducted to evaluate different existing EENFs for N emissions and leaching losses, and then further investigate the effect of these EENFs along with organic amendments on N losses in a rice-wheat cropping system for sustainable farming systems.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.1 Experimental design and crop management\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this study, incubation and lysimeter experiments were conducted to evaluate the response of standard/reference and enhanced-efficiency nitrogenous (Urea-N) fertilizers (EENFs) for NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions and NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e leaching. Different soil, plant, and leachate analyses were conducted and the determination of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions were also carried out following the procedures given below.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe soil used in the incubation study and lysimeter experiments was originally collected from Shahkot, Tehsil Jaranwala, District Faisalabad, Pakistan and filled in the lysimeters to grow rice and wheat crops. The soil was analyzed for different physico-chemical properties (texture, saturation percentage, EC\u003csub\u003ee,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003epH\u003csub\u003es\u003c/sub\u003e, SAR, total soil N and organic carbon) using standard procedures (Page \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 1982). The physicochemical properties of the soil as well as compost and biochar are given in Table 1.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 1.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003ePhysico-chemical properties of the soil, compost and biochar used in the experiments\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 234px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCharacteristics\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSoil\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompost\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 135px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBiochar\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 234px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003epH\u003csub\u003es\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 135px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.93\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 234px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eEC\u003csub\u003ee\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e (dS m\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.52\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.91\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 135px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 234px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCEC\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e (cmol\u003csub\u003ec\u003c/sub\u003e kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e16.23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 135px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e83.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 234px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal organic carbon (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.51\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e72.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 135px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.84\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 234px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal nitrogen (g kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.142\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.94\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 135px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 234px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSAR\u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003e (mmol L\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003csup\u003e\u0026frac12;\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 135px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 234px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSaturation Percentage (%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 135px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 234px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTexture\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eClay Loam\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 150px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 135px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003eEC; electrical conductivity, \u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003eCEC; cation exchange capacity, \u003csup\u003e***\u003c/sup\u003eSAR; sodium adsorption ratio\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.2 Incubation Study\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe incubation study was conducted in the Soil and Water Chemistry Laboratory of the Institute of Soil and Environmental Sciences (ISES), University of Agriculture, Faisalabad (UAF), Pakistan. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the standard (reference uncoated urea) and eight (08) EENFs (coated-urea fertilizers) for NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions under control conditions to shortlist the potential best-performing EENF fertilizer(s) for the upcoming lysimeter experiment. The experiment was conducted in glass jars in which the collected sandy clay loam soil was filled. Soil, prior to filling, was air-dried and ground to pass through a 2 mm sieve. The soil was pre-incubated by filling 100 g air-dried samples in 250 mL wide-mouth glass jars. De-ionized water was added to bring the water-filled pore space (WFPS) to 30% saturation. The jars were tightly closed with a rubber septum for gas sampling. The soil was left in the jar for 21 days (pre-incubation) prior to the start of the experiment with the addition of N fertilizers. After the pre-incubation, the water content in the soil was adjusted to 65 and 100% of WHC (Factor 2). The N-urea fertilizer treatments (Factor 1) employed are given in Table 2. The N-fertilizer treatments comprised two types of uncoated urea and eight (08) coated EENFs i.e., chitosan-based polymer-coated urea, neem-kernels extracted oil (Azadirachtin conc.: 160 ppm) coated urea [neem-coated urea, Fauji Fertilizer Company (FFC) (Pvt) Ltd.], biomaterials-coated urea (developed jointly by FFC and SCME NUST), commercially available urease inhibitor coated urea, commercially available urease + nitrification inhibitor coated urea, zabardast urea, urea coated with zinc oxide/ash and zinc solubilizing microbes (Engro Fertilizer (Pvt) Ltd.), beneficial microbes-coated nutraful urea (Jaffer Brothers (Pvt) Ltd.); and elemental sulfur coated urea (Vital Agri Nutrients (Pvt) Ltd.). The N-fertilizers were added to the soil in the glass jars equivalent to 250 kg N ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e along with a control (no fertilizer), and then jars were placed in the incubation chamber. The concentration of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO were determined from the glass jars at 1, 2, 4, 7, 14, and 21 days after the application of N fertilizer treatments. At the termination of the trial, soil was also analyzed for total soil N (Page \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. 1982).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 2.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eDetails of treatment combinations in incubation and lysimeter experiments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"643\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 293px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eIncubation Experiment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 350px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLysimeter Experiment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFactor 1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(EENFs)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFactor 2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(WHC)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFactor 1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(EENFs)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFactor 2\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e(Organic amendment)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u0026nbsp;(no fertilizer)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl (no fertilizer)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo amendment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard urea (prilled)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100%\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard urea (uncoated)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCompost (1%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard urea (granular)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNeem-coated urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBiochar (1%)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePolymer coated urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBiomaterials-coated urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNeem coated urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZabardast urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBiomaterials coated urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNutraful urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUrease inhibitor-coated urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNitrification + Urease inhibitor coated urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZabardast urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNutraful urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 198px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSulfur coated urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 95px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.3 Lysimeter Experiment\u003c/strong\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the results of the incubation study, the shortlisted EENF products (most efficient in decreasing NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions while maximizing total soil N content) were further evaluated in lysimeter experiments under saturated vs aerated soil conditions while simulating rice-wheat cropping system. The experiment was conducted in lysimeters filled with the same soil used in the incubation study. With the help of a rubber band, a wire gauge was properly fixed at the bottom of the lysimeters, made up of polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and 62 cm in length and 26 cm in diameter. To check the clay movement in the leachate from lysimeters, a thin layer of glass wool along with sand was placed over the wire gauze. A specially designed long-neck funnel was used to fill 42 kg of soil in each lysimeter to avoid segregation of soil particles. Rice \u0026ldquo;basmati-515\u0026rdquo; and wheat \u0026ldquo;Akbar-2019\u0026rdquo; crops were grown in this study. Recommended doses of standard/reference urea (uncoated prilled) and four (04) shortlisted EENFs (Factor 1) along with/without organic amendments (compost, biochar at the rate of 1% on carbon equivalent basis) (Factor 2) were added into the soil of lysimeters. The details of treatment combinations in the lysimeter study are shown in Table 2. The four shortlisted EENFs were neem-coated urea, biomaterials-coated urea, zabardast urea, and nutraful urea along with one standard/reference urea and one control. Standard and EENFs N doses were calculated to be applied at 125 kg N ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eto rice. A full dose of P (75 kg ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eas\u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eP\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO\u003csub\u003e5\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003eusing single super phosphate (SSP)) and K (60 kg ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eas K\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO using sulfate of potash (SOP)) and 1/3\u003csup\u003erd\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eof the recommended dose of N (excluding control treatment) were applied at the time of rice nursery transplanting and remaining in two equal splits; 34 days after transplanting (DAT) and 46 DAT of rice nursery. Six (06) plants per lysimeter were transplanted during the last week of July 2021.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;Crop was irrigated with canal water (EC = 0.31 dS m\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e, SAR = 0.65 and RSC = Nil) and allowance for 10% leaching requirement was provided. Four leachates were collected and analyzed for NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e concentrations. NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emitted from soil during rice crop were collected by placing air-tight transparent static chambers made up of acrylic sheet over the rice plants and taking samples after 1, 2, 4, 8 and 14\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e day of each N application. At physiological maturity, the chlorophyll contents of rice plants were estimated with the help of SPAD-502 chlorophyll meter. Crop was harvested at harvest maturity and crop biomass was recorded and analyzed for plant N contents to calculate total N uptake. Post-rice soil samples were also collected and analyzed for total soil N.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAfter the rice harvest, surface soil in lysimeters was prepared properly through manual hoeing, and wheat was then sown in the same lysimeters. The recommended N, P (as P\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO\u003csub\u003e5\u003c/sub\u003e), and K (as K\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO) were applied at 120, 100 and 60 kg ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e using urea (standard and EENFs), SSP and SOP, respectively. All the P and K were applied at the time of sowing along with 1/3\u003csup\u003erd\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eof the recommended N dose (excluding control treatment). The remaining N was applied in two equal splits at the tillering and booting stages of wheat. Five plants were maintained in each lysimeter. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCrop was irrigated using the same canal water throughout its growth period. Two leachates were collected and analyzed for NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e concentration. The NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO samples during wheat crop were collected from static chamber of PVC after 1, 2, 4, 8 and 14\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e day of each N application. At physiological maturity, plant chlorophyll contents were estimated with the help of SPAD-502 chlorophyll meter. Wheat crop was harvested at its harvest maturity and crop biomass was recorded and analyzed for N contents to calculate total N uptake. Post-wheat soil samples were collected and analyzed for total soil N.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.4 Plant Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePlant analysis for N content in the grain and straw was performed at the Soil and Water Chemistry Lab, ISES, UAF. The plant samples (grain and straw) were digested following standard methods (Wolf, 1982) using sulfuric acid and hydrogen peroxide. Plant N concentration was then estimated from the digested samples following the Kjeldahl method (Jackson, 1982).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.5 Analysis of nitrate in leachates\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNitrate-N concentration in leachates was determined using the chromotropic acid spectrophotometer method (Hadjidemetriou, 1982). First of all, 2 mL of the leachate sample was pipetted into a 50 mL volumetric flask and 1 mL of 0.1% chromotropic acid solution was added, drop by drop, into the solution without any mixing and it was placed in the cold water for few minutes. Then 7 mL conc. H\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eSO\u003csub\u003e4\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003ewas added to flasks and after that samples were left at room temperature for 45 minutes to cool and also to develop color. The same procedure was repeated for the standard NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e solutions (0, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 50 ppm). The absorbance of standard solutions was recorded after 45 minutes at 430 nm wavelength. A calibration curve was prepared for standard solutions by plotting absorbance against the respective NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N concentrations and the NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N concentration in the unknown samples was read from the calibration curve.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.6 Analysis of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe volatilized NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e emissions from standard and EENFs treatments were measured by placing acid traps (4% boric acid (H\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003eBO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e)) inside the headspace of the glass jars and static chambers installed over lysimeters. In the incubation study, the measurement was taken over a period of 21 days by taking gas samples after 1, 2, 4, 7, 14 and 21 days after the application of N-fertilizer treatments. In lysimeter experiments, the volatilized NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e emissions were measured during rice and wheat crops over a period of 14 days at sampling intervals of 1, 2, 4, 7 and 14 days after the application of each dose of N.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOn every sampling occasion of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO, three gas samples were taken at times t\u003csub\u003e0\u003c/sub\u003e, t\u003csub\u003e30\u003c/sub\u003e, and t\u003csub\u003e60\u003c/sub\u003e (30-minute intervals) with the help of 60 mL polypropylene syringes fitted with three-way stopcocks. The headspace of the glass jar or static chamber was thoroughly mixed prior to gas sampling by pumping several times after inserting a syringe through the rubber septum of glass jars. In order to minimize any effect of diurnal variations in NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions during the lysimeter experiment, samples were taken at the same time of day (10 AM\u0026ndash;12 PM). The N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO gas samples collected were transferred into 20 mL glass vials that were pre-evacuated and samples were kept until analysis. The concentration of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO was measured using a gas chromatograph (GC) fitted with an electron capture detector (Varian Inc., California, USA). Soon after taking the gas samples, acid traps placed (for NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e trapping) in the glass jars containing soil were exchanged at the same sampling intervals and NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e concentrations were analyzed by titrating the boric acid (trapping NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e) with 0.0051 \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e H\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eSO\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e2.7 Analysis of soil total N\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTotal soil N was determined by the Kjeldahl method of Bremner and Mulvaney (1982). First of all, 0.2\u0026nbsp;g of finely ground samples of dry soil were digested with concentrated H\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eSO\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e (3 mL) in the presence of a digestion mixture containing CuSO\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e, K\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eSO\u003csub\u003e4\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003e(1.1 g), and Se for about one hour on a heating mantle. The digest was moved to a distillation flask and distilled in the presence of 10 \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e NaOH solution. The distillate was collected in 5 mL boric acid-mixed indicator solution and titrated against 0.01 \u003cem\u003eM\u003c/em\u003e HCl solution. Total N in soil was calculated using the following formula.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg src=\"https://myfiles.space/user_files/122228_c8a1650c59388082/122228_custom_files/img1734543421.png\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.8 Calculation of N use efficiencies\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAgronomic efficiency of nitrogen (AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e), and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) including nitrogen partial factor productivity (PFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e), and partial nitrogen balance (PNB) were calculated using the following equations\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cimg src=\"https://myfiles.space/user_files/122228_c8a1650c59388082/122228_custom_files/img1734543458.png\"\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.9 Statistical analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBoth incubation and lysimeter experiments were planned in two factorial completely randomized design (CRD) with three replicates. The experimental data obtained were statistically analyzed following two-way factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique and treatment means were compared using Tukey\u0026rsquo;s HSD test\u0026nbsp;at 5% level of significance\u0026nbsp;(Steel \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 1997). MS Excel was used for recording data and formatting tables. Origin Pro was used for graph preparation, while SPSS software was used for statistical analysis.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.1 Incubation Study\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.1.1 Ammonia (NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e) volatilization\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe effect of N fertilizers and soil moisture contents was highly significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) on volatilization of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e in the incubation study (see Fig. 1a). The volatilization of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e increased initially after the application of standard urea; and all the EENFs as well, while NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e fluxes were highest during the first week after N application. At 65% water holding capacity (WHC), the cumulative NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization in the soil significantly increased with the application of standard urea (uncoated prilled), however, there was significant \u003cem\u003e(p\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt; 0.05) decrease in the volatilization of the NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e with the application of all EENFs in the treatments under test. Compared to the respective controls, a maximum decrease in NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization was recorded with polymer-coated urea (18.33%) followed by neem-coated urea (15.84%); and minimum (8.01%) with nitrification + urease inhibitor coated urea.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization significantly (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) increased with the increase in soil moisture contents from 65 to 100% of soil WHC. In this case, NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization remained the highest with the application of standard urea (1.02 mg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e soil day\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) and lowest in the control treatment. All EENFs significantly (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) decreased NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization and the maximum decrease was observed with polymer-coated urea (18.35%) which was statistically similar to both nutraful urea (16.76%) and neem-coated urea (15.48%) at 100% WHC.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.1.2 Nitrous Oxide (N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO) emissions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe effect of all N fertilizers and both soil moisture contents were also highly significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) on the N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions during the incubation study (see Fig. 1b). Emissions of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO increased after the application of standard urea and EENFs. At 65% WHC, the cumulative N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emission in the soil was significantly higher with the application of standard urea, however, there was a significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) decrease in the emission of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO with the application of all EENFs. Compared to their respective controls, a maximum percentage decrease in the N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions was observed with neem-coated urea (16.03%) followed by polymer-coated urea (15.23%); and nutraful urea (15.10%).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMoreover, N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions significantly increased at higher (100% WHC) soil moisture contents as observed in case of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization. N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions remained the highest with the application of standard urea and lowest in the control treatment. All the tested EENFs significantly decreased N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions over the standard fertilizer (uncoated urea) and a maximum decrease was found with the neem-coated urea (18.86%) followed by the Nutraful urea (17.72%).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.1.3 Soil total N\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe effect of applied EENFs on total N content in the soil at the end of the incubation study was highly significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) in comparison with standard urea (Table 3). There was a significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) increase in the soil total N contents (mg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) at both moisture levels. At 65% WHC, application of the standard urea increased the total soil N and an increase of 17.42% was observed compared to the control treatment. Application of all EENFs significantly increased soil total N with respect to the standard urea. Neem-coated urea most effectively increased soil total N up to 9.77% over standard urea which was statistically similar to nutraful urea (9.15%).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eEffect of various N fertilizers and soil moisture contents on soil total N (mg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) after incubation study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"588\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTreatments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 351px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSoil Total N (mg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e65% WHC\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100% WHC\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e132 p\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e131 p\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard Urea (Prilled)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e155 n\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e153 o\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard Urea (Granular)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e162 jk\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e158 m\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePolymer Coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e172 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e168 b-f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNeem Coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e170 bc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e167 c-g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBiomaterials-coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e169 b-d\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e166 e-i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eUrease Inhibitor Coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e166 f-i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e161 lm\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNitrification + Urease Inhibitor Coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e165 h-j\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e160 kl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZabardast Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e168 b-e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e165 g-i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNutraful Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e170 ab\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e167 d-h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 236px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSulfur Coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 205px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e167 c-g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 146px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e164 ij\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003eLetters show statistical significance among respective parameters\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e3.2 Lysimeter Experiments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.1 Nitrate (NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e) leaching during rice crop\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe effect of amendments (i.e., compost and biochar) and N fertilizers application (i.e., standard urea (uncoated prilled urea) and EENFs) on NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e leaching during rice growth is given in Fig. 2a. Without amendment, the highest NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eleaching (58.27 mg L\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e per 4 leachates) was recorded with uncoated standard urea and minimum with control in unamended soil. The application of EENFs significantly decreased the concentration of NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003ein leachates. In unamended soil, a maximum decrease (10.34%) over standard urea was observed with neem-coated urea followed by nutraful urea (8.98%), zabardast urea (5.61%); and minimum with biomaterials-coated urea (4.71%). The application of compost in all N fertilizer treatments significantly increased NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eleaching\u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003elosses over their respective treatments in unamended soil, however maximum increase (16.25%) was observed with the addition of compost in uncoated standard urea. The increase with the addition of compost was comparatively less in EENFs treatments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe application of biochar along with EENFs significantly minimized NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eleaching\u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003elosses over their respective treatments in unamended soil and greater decreases were recorded with biochar + EENFs. Biochar-treated neem-coated urea decreased NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eleaching (23.53%) most effectively over unamended standard urea followed by nutraful urea (22.01%), and zabardast urea (18.72%).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.2 Nitrate leaching during wheat crop\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe effect of amendments and N application on NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e during wheat growth is also given in Fig. 2b. Highest NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e (109 mg L\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e per 2 leachates) was recorded with uncoated standard urea (prilled) and minimum with control in unamended soil. EENFs significantly reduced the NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003econcentration in leachates. A maximum decrease (8.40%) over standard urea was observed with nutraful urea followed by neem-coated urea (7.69%) and zabardast urea (6.15%). Similar to rice crop, the application of compost increased NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003eleaching\u003csup\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003elosses, but the effect of compost was relatively less as observed during rice crop. The addition of biochar along with EENFs significantly minimized NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003elosses over their respective treatments in unamended soil and a larger decrease were recorded with biochar + EENFs. \u0026nbsp; Percent decrease with biochar amendment over uncoated standard urea remained the highest in neem-coated urea (14.55%) followed by nutraful urea (14.09%), zabardast urea (11.27%) and biomaterials-coated urea (8.87%).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.3 Ammonia (NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e) volatilization during growth of rice crop\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAmmonia volatilization also significantly increased with the application of standard urea over control treatment (Fig. 3a). Meanwhile, all EENFs significantly decreased NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e losses compared to the standard urea (uncoated prilled urea). Among these, neem-coated urea significantly reduced NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization over standard urea with a maximum reduction of 15.36%, it was followed by the nutraful urea (13.68%). The application of compost with all N fertilizers treatments significantly enhanced NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e losses over their respective treatments in unamended soil. A higher increase was observed in uncoated standard urea (31.62%) as compared to all EENFs.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe application of biochar significantly reduced NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e losses over their respective treatment in the unamended soil. Biochar appeared to be more effective in reducing NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization losses with all EENFs as compared to standard uncoated urea. Under the combination of EENFs with biochar amendment, the percentage decrease in NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization over unamended standard urea remained the highest with neem-coated urea (26.16%) followed by nutraful urea (24.66%) which was statistically similar to biomaterials-coated urea (21.78 %) and zabardast urea (20.17%).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.4 Ammonia volatilization during growth of wheat crop\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSimilar to rice, the effect of N fertilizer treatments and amendments was also significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) on NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization during wheat crop (Fig. 3b). The maximum volatilization of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e (16.55 kg ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) was found in case of standard urea application and all EENFs significantly decreased the NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e losses compared to the standard urea. The highest reduction in NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization (over standard urea) was recorded in case of neem-coated urea (13.80%) which differed non-statistically from nutraful urea (13.17%). As observed during the rice crop, compost addition resulted in higher volatilization losses of 34.95, 32.26, 28.80, 27.20, and 26.31% with standard urea, biomaterials-coated urea, zabardast urea, nutraful urea, and neem-coated urea compared to their respective treatments in unamended soil.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMoreover, the application of biochar significantly decreased NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e losses over their respective treatment in the unamended soil, although a greater decrease was recorded with the biochar + EENFs combination. The decrease in NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization compared to unamended standard urea in biochar-amended treatments remained highest for neem-coated urea (28.57%), which differed non-statistically from biomaterials-coated urea (26.65%), followed by nutraful urea (25.31%) and the lowest for zabardast urea (23.98%).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.5 Nitrous oxide (N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO) emissions during growth of rice crop\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe effect of organic amendments and N fertilizers application on N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emission during rice growth was significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05). In unamended soil, the highest cumulative N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emission (1.11 kg ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) was recorded with uncoated standard urea, and all EENFs significantly reduced the N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emission as compared to uncoated standard urea from the soil in the rice system (Fig. 4a). Maximum decrease in N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emission was observed with the nutraful urea (12.3%) followed by neem-coated urea (11.4%), however, all the EENFs were non-significant among each other. \u0026nbsp;Similar to NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization, compost addition along with EENFs enhanced N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO losses over their respective treatments in unamended soil and a greater increase as recorded with compost + uncoated standard urea combination.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBiochar application along with uncoated standard urea and EENFs minimized N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO losses over their respective treatments in unamended soil and greater decrease were recorded with biochar + EENFs combination. Although the decrease in biochar amendment remained the highest (26.1%) in the lysimeter fertilized with nutraful urea followed by neem-coated urea (24.2%) but all the EENFs remained non-significant with each other.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.6 N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions during growth of wheat crop\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe highest N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions were recorded with standard urea and minimum with control in unamended soil. The application of all EENFs significantly decreased N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions over the standard urea (Fig. 4b). In unamended soil, a maximum decrease (15.27%) over standard urea was observed with the neem-coated urea followed by nutraful urea (12.9%), zabardast urea (9.7%) and biomaterials-coated urea. Emission losses of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO during wheat crop grown in compost-treated soil significantly (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) increased compared to their respective treatments in the unamended soil and greater increase (29.80%) was recorded with the fertilization of uncoated standard urea.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBiochar amendments along with uncoated standard urea and all EENFs induced significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) decrease in N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO losses over their respective treatments in the unamended soil and greater decrease were recorded with biochar + EENFs. Biochar + neem-coated urea decreased N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emission most effectively (28.04%) over unamended standard urea followed by nutraful urea (24.57%), biomaterials-coated urea (22.47%) and zabardast urea (20.5%).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.7 Impact on paddy and straw yield of rice\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe effect of N-fertilizer treatments and soil organic amendments was significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) on paddy and straw yield of rice (Fig. 5). The highest paddy yield (23.56 g lysimeter\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) was recorded with neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful (23.37 g lysimeter\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) and the lowest (19.19 g lysimeter\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) from the control treatment in unamended soil.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe application of compost and biochar along with all EENFs significantly increased paddy yield over their respective treatments in unamended soil although a greater increase was recorded with biochar + EENFs. Biochar-amended neem-coated urea most effectively increased (17.39%) paddy yield over unamended standard urea followed by nutraful urea (14.92%), and a minimum with the control. Similarly, application of biochar amendment also enhanced the straw yield and the maximum increase (16.96%) was recorded in neem-coated urea followed by nutraful urea (15.22%), biomaterial-coated urea (14.10%), zabardast urea (10.71%) and a minimum in the control.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.8 Impact on grain and straw yield of wheat\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGrain and straw yield of wheat also significantly increased with the application of EENFs compared to the standard urea and control treatments in the unamended soil (Fig. 5). In unamended soil, the highest grain yield (31.10 g lysimeter\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) was recorded with neem-coated urea followed by nutraful urea (30.52 g lysimeter\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) and the lowest (25.61 g lysimeter\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) from control of unamended soil. It was found that neem-coated urea produced the highest straw yield (47.12 g lysimeter\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) followed by nutraful urea (46.46 g lysimeter\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e), and the lowest (39.96 g lysimeter\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) from control of unamended soil.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCompost and biochar along with EENFs further showed a significant increase in grain and straw yield of wheat over their respective treatments in unamended soil. While the highest increase was observed with biochar + EENFs combinations. Biochar amended neem-coated urea enhanced grain yield most efficiently (18.29%) compared to unamended standard urea, followed by nutraful urea (15.33%). Similarly, biochar-amended neem-coated urea also performed better than unamended standard urea in terms of increasing straw yield (14.12%), followed by nutraful urea (11.71%) and zabardast urea (11.31%). Whereas, the minimum grain and straw yield was recorded with the control.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.9 Impact on SPAD chlorophyll values in plants\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe SPAD chlorophyll values in both crops were significantly increased with the application of EENFs compared to standard urea. The SPAD chlorophyll in rice and wheat were 16.48% and 20.03% higher with neem-coated urea than standard urea in unamended soil, respectively (Fig. 6). Application of compost and biochar, in combination with EENFs fertilizers, significantly increased the SPAD chlorophyll values. However, a maximum increase in SPAD chlorophyll (23.39%) was observed with biochar amendment with nutraful urea in rice crop. In wheat crop, biochar amendment also proved to be more effective in increasing the SPAD chlorophyll contents than compost and a maximum increase (24.93%) was observed with zabardast urea which differed non-significantly from the neem-coated urea (24.63%). \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.10 Nitrogen concentration in crops\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNitrogen concentration (%) in the paddy and straw of rice plants fertilized with standard urea (uncoated prilled) and different EENFs remained significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) (see Table 4). The EENFs showed a significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) influence on N concentration over standard urea by enhancing N concentration in rice paddy and straw. Plant N assimilation remained the highest in paddy and straw (1.32 and 0.83%) with neem-coated urea, followed by the nutraful urea (1.29 and 0.82%), and a minimum in the control treatment. There was an increase of 9.42 and 11.16% in N concentration with neem-coated urea over the standard urea in paddy and straw of rice plants grown in unamended soil. Biochar and compost amendments significantly increased N tissue concentration over their respective treatments in unamended soils. Biochar + EENFs were found to be better in increasing N concentration and there was an increase of 15.79 and 17.86% in paddy and straw of rice plants with neem-coated urea, respectively.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSimilarly, all EENFs significantly (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) increased N concentration in grain and straw of wheat over the standard (uncoated prilled) urea (Table 5). Neem-coated urea improved N concentration in wheat grain and straw by up to 12.67% and 15.51% more than standard urea, respectively. Among biochar and compost amendments, biochar was proved to be most effective in increasing grain and straw N concentrations in wheat plants. Biochar amended neem-coated urea induced 22.04 and 20.41 % more N in grain and straw of wheat, respectively than that of the standard urea in unamended soil.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.11 Agronomic N Use Efficiency (AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAgronomic N Use Efficiency (AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e) was the highest (8.49 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) with the neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful urea (8.24 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) while the lowest with the standard urea (5.62 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) in the rice crop without any amendment. The application of both the amendments (i.e., biochar and compost) increased the AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e in rice compared to their respective treatments in unamended control. The AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e remained the highest with biochar amendment as compared to the compost-amended treatments. The highest AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e (10.00 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) was recorded with neem-coated urea followed by nutraful urea (9.29 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e), biomaterials-coated urea (8.68 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e), zabardast urea (8.35 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) while the lowest was recorded with the uncoated standard urea (6.40 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) (Table 6).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eEffect of N fertilizers and organic amendments on N content (%) in paddy and straw of rice crop\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"908\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 169px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTreatments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" style=\"width: 372px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePaddy\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 366px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStraw\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 169px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNo Amendment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompost\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBiochar\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNo Amendment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompost\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBiochar\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 169px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.35\u0026plusmn;0.009 j\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.41\u0026plusmn;0.015 i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.44\u0026plusmn;0.021 i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.24\u0026plusmn;0.003 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.29\u0026plusmn;0.018 g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.30\u0026plusmn;0.009g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 169px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.20\u0026plusmn;0.015 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.25\u0026plusmn;0.026 g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.26\u0026plusmn;0.003 fg\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.75\u0026plusmn;0.020 f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.76\u0026plusmn;0.003 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.78\u0026plusmn;0.009e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 169px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNeem-coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.31\u0026plusmn;0.019 c-e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.36\u0026plusmn;0.015 ab\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.39\u0026plusmn;0.007 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.83\u0026plusmn;0.006 c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.87\u0026plusmn;0.009 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.88\u0026plusmn;0.006a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 169px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBiomaterials-coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.28\u0026plusmn;0.003 e-g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.32\u0026plusmn;0.009 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.34\u0026plusmn;0.006 bc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.81\u0026plusmn;0.007 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.82\u0026plusmn;0.009 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.84\u0026plusmn;0.012bc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 169px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZabardast urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.27\u0026plusmn;0.012 fg\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.31\u0026plusmn;0.013 c-e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.32\u0026plusmn;0.018 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.80\u0026plusmn;0.018 d\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.83\u0026plusmn;0.003 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.83\u0026plusmn;0.019c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 169px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNutraful Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.29\u0026plusmn;0.007 d-f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.34\u0026plusmn;0.012 bc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.37\u0026plusmn;0.015 ab\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.82\u0026plusmn;0.003 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.86\u0026plusmn;0.006 ab\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.88\u0026plusmn;0.008a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 169px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 3px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 120px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003eDifferent letters show statistically significant differences (P\u0026le;0.05) among treatment means of the respective parameter\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003eTable 5.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eEffect of N fertilizers and organic amendments on N content (%) in grain and straw of wheat crop\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"909\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTreatments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 370px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGrain\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"3\" style=\"width: 370px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eStraw\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNo Amendment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompost\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBiochar\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eNo Amendment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompost\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBiochar\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.42\u0026plusmn;0.006 j\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.52\u0026plusmn;0.026 i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.56\u0026plusmn;0.032 i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.28\u0026plusmn;0.017 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.36\u0026plusmn;0.009 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.38\u0026plusmn;0.009g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.21\u0026plusmn;0.029 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.29\u0026plusmn;0.017 g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.31\u0026plusmn;0.012 e-g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.82\u0026plusmn;0.020 g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.86\u0026plusmn;0.012 fg\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.89\u0026plusmn;0.012ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNeem-coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.36\u0026plusmn;0.012 de\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.47\u0026plusmn;0.016 ab\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.48\u0026plusmn;0.018 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.94\u0026plusmn;0.009 a-d\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.97\u0026plusmn;0.010 a-c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.98\u0026plusmn;0.009a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBiomaterials-coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.35\u0026plusmn;0.018 df\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.42\u0026plusmn;0.026 bc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.46\u0026plusmn;0.006 ab\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.93\u0026plusmn;0.029 b-d\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.96\u0026plusmn;0.015 a-c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.96\u0026plusmn;0.008a-c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZabardast urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.31\u0026plusmn;0.009 fg\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.36\u0026plusmn;0.020 de\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.38\u0026plusmn;0.015 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.90\u0026plusmn;0.012 df\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.93\u0026plusmn; 0.022 b-d\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.94\u0026plusmn;0.026a-d\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 170px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNutraful Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.33\u0026plusmn;0.009 e-g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.43\u0026plusmn;0.012 a-c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.43\u0026plusmn;0.009 a-c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.93\u0026plusmn;0.006 c-e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.97\u0026plusmn;0.020 a-c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 123px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.98\u0026plusmn;0.018ab\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003eDifferent letters show statistically significant differences (P\u0026le;0.05) among treatment means of the respective parameter\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 6.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eEffect of N fertilizers and organic amendments on AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e, PFP\u003csub\u003eN,\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003eand\u003csub\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003ePNB of rice and wheat and post-harvest total soil N\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"center\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"0\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"903\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;Treatments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" style=\"width: 99px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAmendment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" style=\"width: 307px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRice\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd colspan=\"4\" style=\"width: 317px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eWheat\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePNB\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSoil Total N\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e(post-rice)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePNB\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSoil Total N\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e(post-wheat)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 99px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e124 k\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e114 l\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard Urea (uncoated)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"5\" style=\"width: 99px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo Amendment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.62 h\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e28.55 k\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.34 i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e151 i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.63 i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40.03 i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.48 i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e157 j\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNeem-coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.49 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.41 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.41 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e167 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.80 c-f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.20 fg\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.59 f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e171 de\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBiomaterials-coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.69 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.61 gh\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.39 g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e162 g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.44 f-h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.84 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.56 g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e166 gh\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZabardast urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.44 f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e30.37 hi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.38 g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e161 g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.22 gh\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.62 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.54 gh\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e167 fg\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNutraful Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.24 de\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.16 fg\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.40 f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e165 f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.99 e-g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e42.39 gh\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.56 g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e170 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 99px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e129 j\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e119 k\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard Urea (uncoated)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"5\" style=\"width: 99px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCompost\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.20 gh\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.65 j\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.37 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e155 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.08 hi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.62 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.54 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e161 i\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNeem-coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.24 b\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32.68 b\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.44 bc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e172 a-c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e12.59 bd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.13 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.66 b\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e177 a-c\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBiomaterials-coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.99 d-f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.44 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.41 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e167 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.55 d-g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44.09 df\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.63 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e170 e-g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZabardast urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.12 d-f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.56 d-f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.41 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e165 f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.91 c-e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44.45 de\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.61 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e172 de\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNutraful Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.00 bc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32.45 bc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.43 bd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e171bd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.37 d-g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e43.91 ef\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.63 de\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e175 b-d\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 99px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e129 j\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e117 kl\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStandard Urea (uncoated)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"5\" style=\"width: 99px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBiochar\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.40 g\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.92 ij\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.38 gh\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e158 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.29 hi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.83 h\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.55 gh\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e163 hi\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNeem-coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.00 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e33.51 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.47 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e174 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e14.80 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e47.35 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.70 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e179 a\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBiomaterials-coated Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.68 b-d\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32.20 b-d\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.43 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e169 de\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e11.79 c-f\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44.34 de\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.65 bc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e173 de\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eZabardast urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.35 c-e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e31.87 c-e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.42 de\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e170 c-e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.07 bc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.62 bc\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.63 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e174 cd\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 181px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNutraful Urea\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.29 b\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32.80 b\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.45 b\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 76px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e173 ab\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.62 ab\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46.16 b\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 77px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.66 b\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 86px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e178 ab\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e*\u003c/sup\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e = Nitrogen Agronomic Efficiency (kg kg\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;1\u003c/sup\u003e); \u003cstrong\u003ePFP\u003csub\u003eN =\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/strong\u003eNitrogen Partial Factor Productivity (kg kg\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;1\u003c/sup\u003e); \u003cstrong\u003ePNB\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e= Partial Nitrogen Balance (kg kg\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003csup\u003e**\u003c/sup\u003eDifferent letters show statistically significant differences (P\u0026le;0.05) among treatment means of the respective parameter\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;Moreover, AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e in the wheat crop was relatively higher compared to the rice crop. In unamended soil, AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e was recorded at maximum with neem-coated urea (11.80 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) followed by the nutraful urea (10.99 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) and minimum with the standard urea. The decreasing order for AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e in wheat was in the order of neem-coated urea\u0026gt;nutraful urea\u0026gt;biomaterials-coated urea\u0026gt;zabardast urea\u0026gt; standard urea (uncoated). Similar to the rice crop, the AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e increased in wheat for all the treatments with the application of biochar and compost amendments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.12 N partial factor productivity (PFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e) of crops\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eN partial factor productivity (PFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e)\u0026nbsp;was the highest (31.41 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) with the neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful urea (31.16 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) and the lowest with the uncoated standard urea (31.16 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) in the rice crop (Table 5). Application of both amendments (compost and biochar) increased the PFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e in rice compared to their respective treatments in unamended control. The PFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e remained the highest with biochar amendment as compared to compost. The highest PFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e (33.51 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) was recorded with neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful urea (32.80 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) with the application of biochar.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLike that of the AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e, the\u0026nbsp;PFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e in the wheat crop was also relatively higher compared to the rice crop (Table 5). In unamended soil, PFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e was recorded at maximum with neem-coated urea (43.20 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) followed by the nutraful urea (42.39 kg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) and minimum with the uncoated standard urea (40.03 kg kg-1). Similar to the rice crop, the\u0026nbsp;PFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e increased in all the tested treatments with the application of biochar and compost amendments. \u0026nbsp;The decreasing order for PFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e remained as neem-coated urea\u0026gt;nutraful urea\u0026gt;biomaterials-coated urea\u0026gt;zabardast urea\u0026gt; standard uncoated urea.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.13 Partial N balance (PNB)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe partial N balance (PNB) was recorded as the highest (0.41) with the neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful urea (0.40). Application of both the amendments (compost and biochar) increased PNB in rice compared to their respective treatments in uncoated prilled urea. The PNB values remained the highest with biochar amendment compared to the compost. The highest PNB (0.47) was recorded with neem-coated urea followed by the nutraful urea (0.45), and biomaterials-coated urea (0.43) (see Table 5).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;Like that of PFP, the PNB in wheat was relatively higher compared to the rice crop. In uncoated urea applied treatments, the PNB was recorded maximum with neem-coated urea (0.59) followed by the biomaterials-coated urea (0.56) and nutraful urea (0.56). Similar to the rice crop, it increased in all the tested treatments with the application of biochar and compost amendments. \u0026nbsp;The decreasing order remained as neem-coated urea \u0026gt;nutraful urea \u0026gt; biomaterials-coated urea \u0026gt;zabardast urea \u0026gt; standard uncoated urea.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e3.2.14 Total soil N (mg kg\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe effect of N fertilizers (standard and EENFs) on the total N content of the soil after rice crop was significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) in unamended soil and total N in soil increased in all treatments of EENFs over standard urea in unamended soil. A maximum increase in total N was recorded with neem-coated urea (10.60%) over standard urea which was statistically as par with nutraful urea (9.27%) and minimum with biomaterials-coated urea (6.62%). The addition of compost and biochar amendments to all treatments significantly increased the total soil N. A maximum increase was recorded with neem-coated urea (15.23%) followed by nutraful urea (14.57%) and a minimum with biomaterials-coated urea (11.92%) in biochar-amended soil. Post-wheat analysis revealed that the total N of soil increased from that of post-rice crop with significant treatment differences.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.1 Incubation experiment\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere was a higher volatilization of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e at 100% WHC of the soil in comparison to the 65% WHC soil conditions. Soil moisture has a significant effect in defining the ultimate fate of applied N fertilizers. There is an increased rate of hydrolysis in wet soil and resultantly NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization increases as the rate of hydrolysis is increased (Sigurdarson \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018). In actuality, N losses are increased due to the extended contact of urea fertilizer particles with wet soil as the urea itself is highly hygroscopic. The urea dissolves with increasing moisture and can be lost through the process of volatilization due to a significant increase in the rate of hydrolysis soon after its application (Drame \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2023). It was also found previously that NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e-N concentration in soil water increased significantly after urea application in soils, which is potentially very susceptible to NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization (Lee \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021). However, we have found that NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization decreased with the application of EENFs compared to uncoated urea in this study. Neem oil combinations or other coatings of urea fertilizer granules reduced the N release rate and ultimately decreased its losses through volatilization (Ghafoor \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021; Manzoor \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe effect of soil water content on the emissions of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO was also highly significant (\u003cem\u003ep \u0026lt;\u003c/em\u003e 0.05) in our study. In fact, the N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions (N losses) increased with the increase in soil water content, i.e., from 65% to 100% WHC which is in agreement with Clough \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2004). Generally, denitrification increases as water content in the soil increases and resultantly there are more emissions of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO (Shaaban \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018). In our study, higher emissions of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO were linked to the highest (100%) WHC of the soil, suggesting that the majority of the losses were a result of the denitrification process (i.e., in the absence of sufficient oxygen within the soil environment under flooded conditions that mimic wetland rice cultivation practice). Net N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions begin to rise significantly when the soil WHC \u0026ge; 80% because soil pores are filled with water in heavily moist, and they hinder the diffusion of O\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e from the atmosphere into the soil. Therefore, soil O\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e concentration decreases, creating hypoxic or anoxic conditions that are favorable for denitrifying bacteria, and consequently, the denitrification process is enhanced (Cocco et al., 2018;\u0026nbsp;Grzyb et al., 2021). Higher soil moisture levels can enhance the availability of NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N (the substrate for denitrification), improve soil microbial activity (including denitrifying bacteria) and increase the availability of dissolved organic carbon (an energy source for denitrifying bacteria), thereby boosting the denitrification process of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions (Liu et al., 2022).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe emissions of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO were also found to be decreased with the application of all coated urea fertilizers (EENFs). Neem oil coating and/or other coatings of urea fertilizer granule reduced the urea-N release rate and ultimately decreased its losses through emissions (Lyu \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021). Many of the meliacins identified in neem oil (mainly azadirachtin, nimbin, and salannin) coated urea fertilizer have already been reported to inhibit nitrification potential ranging from 4 to 31% in soil incubation studies (Kumar et al., 2007). In this incubation study, neem-coated, polymer-coated and nutraful urea were found the best fertilizers among all tested EENFs in decreasing NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions while maximizing total N content in soils. These four shortlisted EENFs were further evaluated in lysimeter study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e4.2 Lysimeter experiments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFurther in this study, lysimeter experiments showed that NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-N leaching decreased with the application of EENFs confirming that such value-added urea fertilizer products can decrease groundwater pollution and increase the NUE through a slow release of N to maintain optimum yield (Rathnappriya \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022). Due to the hydrophobic nature and the antimicrobial properties of neem oil, neem-coated urea was slowly dissolved in soil solution and gradually mineralized by soil microbes (Singh, 2016). The decreased leaching might be due to the delayed conversion of ammonical N to nitrite (NO₂⁻) form, thereby improving and prolonging the continuous availability of N to the rice and wheat crops. The application of biochar further decreased the NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e-leaching in soil during rice and wheat crops. In particular, the biochar amendment greatly decreased the N leaching losses and enhanced the uptake of N in our study. This might be due to the reason that biochar has a higher ion exchange capacity, adsorption ability and WHC (Basso \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2013; Das, 2024). Our results seem to be in agreement with previous studies in which incorporation of biochar in soil reduced N losses through leaching owing to its WHC and N ions adsorption (Kameyama \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2012; Tian \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2017).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe volatilization of the NH\u003csub\u003e3\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003ealso decreased with the application of EENFs in the lysimeter experiments. Neem oil coating and other coatings of urea fertilizer reduced the urea-N release rate and ultimately decreased its losses through volatilization (Nash \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2015; Liu \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2020). A significant decrease in the volatilization of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e was recorded with biochar incorporation which was due to its higher sorption capacity, highly porous structure and surface area. Biochar might have reduced the volatilization of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003edue to its acidic functional groups that can absorb NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e-N (Ramalingappa \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2023; Tangarajan \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018; Agyarko-Mintah \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2017). However, despite its well-demonstrated environment-related research benefits, the commercial-scale availability of biochar to farmers and growers at an economical price remains a challenge.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSimilarly, the emissions of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO also decreased with the application of EENFs in both tested crops (rice and wheat) in our study. Neem oil combinations and other coatings of urea fertilizer reduced the urea-N release rate, decreased its losses through emissions, and stabilized it for efficient utilization because N is gradually hydrolyzed and later on nitrified/de-nitrified in the soil environment. It has been investigated that enhanced efficiency fertilizer application can help decrease residual soil N by matching the supply of N with that of the plant N demand, and ultimately decreases the available N within the soil environment for onward N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO production/emission (Lyu \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021; Manzoor \u003cem\u003eet\u0026nbsp;al\u003c/em\u003e. 2021).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe tested EENFs along with the biochar further decreased the emissions of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO in rice and wheat crops in both soil environments. A further decrease in N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO was observed in our study with the application of biochar + EENFs which could be due to the reason that it might have resulted in lower NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u003c/sup\u003e contents and higher NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e concentrations after the addition of N fertilizer thereby affecting soil N availability (Dawar \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021). The adsorption of soil NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e by biochar reduced N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions (Sharma, 2018). Furthermore, an increase in crop productivity with the application of biochar decreased the essential crop nutrient(s) losses (Khan \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2024; He \u003cem\u003eet\u0026nbsp;al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe organic amendments coupled with N-fertilizers significantly enhance the soil microbial population that regulates N availability, increases fertilizer efficiencies, and minimizes environmental impacts such as gaseous emissions and NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u003c/sup\u003e leaching (Cocco et al., 2018). Soil microorganisms decompose organic fertilizers by releasing NH₄⁺ for plant uptake while stabilizing N in the soil. Microbes temporarily incorporate available N into their biomass, preventing N losses through leaching or volatilization, and then make it available to plants later upon microbial turnover. Nitrification and denitrification are known to be the main pathways of N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO production and are controlled by the enzymatic activities of soil microbes. Nitrifying bacteria like \u003cem\u003eNitrosomonas\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eNitrobacter\u003c/em\u003e oxidize NH₄⁺ to NO₂⁻ and NO₃⁻, while denitrifying bacteria (e.g., \u003cem\u003ePseudomonas\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eParacoccus\u003c/em\u003e) further reduce NO₃⁻ and NO₂⁻ to gaseous N₂O, releasing N into the atmosphere (Grzyb et al., 2021).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;The grain and straw yield of rice and wheat also registered an increase with the application of standard urea (uncoated prilled) over control treatment where no N was applied. However, the application of EENFs further improved the yield of both crops over standard uncoated urea. An increase in grain and straw yield with the application of EENFs resulted from the increased NUE of these fertilizers compared to the standard urea. There were fewer N losses with EENFs in the form of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e, N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions, and NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e leaching that enhanced the NUE in rice and wheat and ultimately, the yield of these crops. Maximum N availability to rice and wheat during the growth period with these EENFs, increased the root and shoot growth and chlorophyll content that resulted in increased biomass and ultimately higher plant height and productive tillers in our experiment (data not presented).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMore biomass production is an indication of higher yield, and in this work, EENFs helped in boosting the biomass production of rice and wheat crops compared to the standard urea. EENFs such as neem-coated urea induced slower transformation of urea-N into plant-available forms because of the presence of Azadirachtin in comparison to the standard (uncoated) urea thus decreasing its potential losses (Khandey \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2017). All EENFs, including neem-coated urea, also decreased the availability of NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003c/sup\u003e to denitrifying bacteria, thereby enhancing N efficiency which led to an increase in grain and biomass yields of rice and wheat (Timilsina et al., 2023; Kundu \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2013).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBiochar application along with the EENFs further improved the yield of rice and wheat. The introduction of biochar amendment further decreased the N losses in the form of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO, thus increasing the N availability. In literature, higher retention of mineral N in NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e form rather than NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u0026ndash;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003ehas been reported for several days, after the application of urea, which might have enhanced the uptake of N leading to increased crop yield. Higher availability of NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e increased crop yield and nutrition as relatively less energy is required by the crop to absorb NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sup\u003ecompared to the NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e (Dawar \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021). Better grain and straw yields of rice and wheat might also be due to the increased WHC of soil and organic matter thereby, retaining moisture to a reasonable level during the wheat crop, ultimately increasing the grain yields. As reported elsewhere, biochar incorporation could efficiently increase total N concentration, enhancing the availability of N by decreasing N losses (NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO) from the soil and bringing economic benefits due to increased NUE (Niu \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2018).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOn the contrary, we found that compost application alone or along with all EENFs significantly enhanced NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions over their respective controls. A higher increase was observed in uncoated standard urea compared to other EENFs. It is commonly known that adding compost or manures to the soil can increase the activity of urease enzymes, which hydrolyze urea molecules into NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e molecules from inorganic fertilizers, supplying labile N sources into the soil (Lee \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021). Similarly, Sigurdarson \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2018) suggested that high urease activity is linked with increased NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions when urea fertilizer is applied with compost or manure, possibly increasing urea hydrolysis in soils. Our results also indicate that compost application enhances urea hydrolyzation in soils, which might facilitate the liberation of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e resulting in increased NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization during rice cultivation. Therefore, compost amendment significantly increases NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization in soils, which should be considered as the main regulating factor when applying compost in the field.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEENFs significantly increased N contents in rice and wheat crop plants compared to the standard (uncoated) urea. This might be due to the decreased losses of N in the form of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e, N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO, and NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e after the application of these EENFs (hence increased soil enrichment) that ultimately enhanced N uptake in rice and wheat. The increase in the percent N contents in plant parts with EENFs application might also be due to higher availability of N in the rhizosphere, hence decreased N losses in this study. Higher uptake of N has also been recorded elsewhere with the application of slow-release N fertilizers (Folina \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2021). Application of biochar further improved the N content in rice and wheat due to the reason that biochar might have further decreased the N losses in the form of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO, thus increasing the N availability.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEENFs offer a significant boost to agronomic efficiency of N (AE\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e), N partial factor productivity (PFP\u003csub\u003eN\u003c/sub\u003e), and partial nitrogen balance (PNB) due to their innovative formulations and the nature of coating materials that encapsulate urea-N. These fertilizers mitigated N losses through volatilization, leaching, and denitrification, thereby maximizing nutrient uptake by both crops and minimizing environmental impacts. By incorporating inhibitors or other coating materials that regulate N release (as in neem-coated urea and other EENF sources used), EENFs synchronize nutrient availability with crop demand, leading to improved utilization rates and reduced application frequencies. Moreover, their targeted delivery systems ensured that N is efficiently utilized by both crops, promoting healthier growth and higher yields in the present study. The adoption of EENFs thus represents a pivotal step towards sustainable agriculture, as it not only enhances productivity but also minimizes N pollution, safeguarding both agricultural livelihoods and environmental integrity.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe total soil N increased after rice and wheat crop and there was a greater increase in soil total N contents in EENFs compared to the standard urea. An increase in soil total N could be due to the reason that there were lesser N losses in the form of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization, N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emission and NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e as reflected in the result of our study. The NUE of the EENFs remained the highest compared to the standard urea (Nishimura \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2022). The total concentration of N in soil increased due to the availability of N for a longer period of time by using EENFs (Wang \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e., 2024). An earlier experiment found that slow-release N fertilizers increased total soil N when applied at an equal level in comparison with standard urea (Zheng \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. 2016). Our results are also in agreement with Gangurde \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2018) who found that coated N fertilizer application increased soil N (188.40 kg ha\u003csup\u003e-1\u003c/sup\u003e) contents significantly. Our findings are in line with Ali \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. (2007) who observed that neem-coated urea decreased N losses and improved total soil N.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis synergistic approach of combining EENFs with biochar can significantly enhance soil fertility by improving nutrient retention, reducing N emission and leaching losses, and leading to more efficient nutrient use. It can also increase crop yields while minimizing the environmental impact associated with excessive fertilizer application in the context of sustainable agriculture. Additionally, biochar\u0026apos;s ability to improve soil structure and water retention complements the gradual nutrient release, promoting healthier soils and plant growth. Consequently, the application of EENFs coupled biochar should be an innovative and effective approach to mitigate N emissions from agriculture. \u0026nbsp;This approach supports sustainable farming practices by enhancing soil health, reducing input costs, and mitigating environmental pollution.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eDifferent types of enhanced efficiency nitrogenous fertilizers (EENFs) significantly decreased the N losses in the forms of NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO in comparison with the standard uncoated urea in our incubation study. All the shortlisted EENFs (from the incubation study) also proved their worth through decreased N losses during rice and wheat growth in the lysimeter study. Compared to the standard (uncoated prilled) urea, all the tested EENFs decreased the NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e, N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO, and NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e-\u003c/sup\u003e losses, and increased NUEs (agronomic efficiency; nitrogen partial factor productivity; and partial nitrogen balance) alongside increasing the yield of rice and wheat. Neem-coated urea proved to be the best EENF among the tested products. Biochar incorporation with EENFs fertilizers further improved the NUE, decreased N losses, and enhanced crop yields. In our assessment, the tested biochar amendment induced further growth and enhanced yield attributes compared to the compost amendment. In summary, the use of commercially available EENFs could help in reducing the N losses (through less leaching and reduced GHG emissions) as per the commitment made by the countries during the Colombo Declaration wherein they agreed to halve N waste by 2030.\u003c/p\u003e\n"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eDeclaration of competing interest\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data used in this research article will be provided upon request.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgment\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research work was supported by the Higher Education Commission, Pakistan (HEC-NRPU 20-11523).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAasmi, A. L. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Impacts of slow-release nitrogen fertilizer rates on the morpho-physiological traits, yield, and nitrogen use efficiency of rice under different water regimes. \u003cem\u003eAgriculture\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e12\u003c/strong\u003e, 86; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12010086 (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAgyarko-Mintah, E. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Biochar lowers ammonia emission and improves nitrogen retention in poultry litter composting. \u003cem\u003eWaste Manag\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e61\u003c/strong\u003e, 129-137 (2017).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlbahri, G. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Enhancing essential grains yield for sustainable food security and bio-safe agriculture through latest innovative approaches. \u003cem\u003eAgronomy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e, 1709; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13071709 (2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAn, H., Owens, J., Beres, B., Li Y. \u0026amp; Hao, X. Nitrous oxide emissions with enhanced efficiency and conventional urea fertilizers in winter wheat. \u003cem\u003eNutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e119\u003c/strong\u003e, 307-322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-021-10118-9 (2021).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnas, M. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Fate of nitrogen in agriculture and environment: agronomic, eco-physiological and molecular approaches to improve nitrogen use efficiency. \u003cem\u003eBiol Res\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e53\u003c/strong\u003e, 47; https://doi.org/10.1186/s40659-020-00312-4 (2020).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBasso, A. S., Miguez, F. E., Laird, D. A., Horton, R. \u0026amp; Westgate, M. Assessing potential of biochar for increasing water-holding capacity of sandy soils. \u003cem\u003eGCB Bioene\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e5\u003c/strong\u003e, 132-143 (2013).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBeusen, A. H. W., Bouwman, A. F., Heuberger, P. S. C., Van Drecht, G. \u0026amp; Van Der Hoek, K. W. Bottom-up uncertainty estimates of global ammonia emissions from global agricultural production systems. \u003cem\u003eAtmos. Environ\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e42\u003c/strong\u003e, 6067-6077 (2008).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBordoloi, N., Baruah, K. K. \u0026amp; Hazarika, B. Fertilizer management through coated urea to mitigate greenhouse gas (N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO) emission and improve soil quality in agroclimatic zone of Northeast India. \u003cem\u003eEnviron Sci Pollut Res\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e27\u003c/strong\u003e, 11919\u0026ndash;11931 (2020).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBouyoucos, G. J. Hydrometer method improved for making particle size analyses of soils. \u003cem\u003eAgron. J\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e54\u003c/strong\u003e, 464-465 (1962). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCai, G. X., Chen D.L., Ding H., Pacholski A., Fan X. H., Zhu Z. L. 2002. Nitrogen losses from fertilizers applied to maize, wheat and rice in the North China Plain. \u003cem\u003eNutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems\u003c/em\u003e, 63, 187\u0026ndash;195.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCassman, K. G. \u0026amp; Dobermann, A. Nitrogen and the future of agriculture: 20 years on. \u003cem\u003eAmbio\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e51\u003c/strong\u003e, 17\u0026ndash;24 (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChen, J. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Environmentally friendly fertilizers: A review of materials used and their effects on the environment. \u003cem\u003eSci. Total Environ\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e613\u0026ndash;614\u003c/strong\u003e, 829-839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.186 (2018).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eClough, T. J., Kelliher, F. M., Sherlock, R. R. \u0026amp; Ford, C. D. Lime and soil moisture effects on nitrous oxide emissions from a urine patch. \u003cem\u003eSoil Sci. Soc. Am. J.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e68\u003c/strong\u003e, 1600-1609 (2004).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCocco, E. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. How shallow water table conditions affect N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions and associated microbial abundances under different nitrogen fertilisations. \u003cem\u003eAgric. Ecosyst. Environ\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e261\u003c/strong\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;11 (2018).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCrop Prospects and Food Situation. No. 2, April 2009. Rome. FAO. 2009e. Policy responses to higher food prices. Committee on Commodity Problems\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDas, S. K. Adsorption and desorption capacity of different metals influenced by biomass derived biochar. \u003cem\u003eEnviron Syst Res.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40068-024-00335-w (2024).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDawar, K. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Biochar and urease inhibitor mitigate NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions and improve wheat yield in a urea fertilized alkaline soil. \u003cem\u003eSci Rep\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e11\u003c/strong\u003e, 17413; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-96771-0 (2021).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDawar, K. et al. The effect of biochar and nitrogen inhibitor on ammonia and nitrous oxide emissions and wheat productivity. \u003cem\u003eJ. Plant Growth Regul.\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e40\u003c/strong\u003e, 2465-2475 (2020).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDrame, M. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Effects of hotter, drier conditions on gaseous losses from nitrogen fertilisers, \u003cem\u003eJ. Environ. Manage\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e345\u003c/strong\u003e, 118671; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118671 (2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFolina, A. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Evaluation of various nitrogen indices in N-Fertilizers with inhibitors in field crops: A review. Agron. \u003cstrong\u003e11\u003c/strong\u003e, 418; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11030418 (2021).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGhafoor, I. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Slow-release nitrogen fertilizers enhance growth, yield, NUE in wheat crop and reduce nitrogen losses under an arid environment. \u003cem\u003eEnviron. Sci. Pollut. Res\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e28, \u003c/strong\u003e43528-43543 (2021). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGrzyb, A., Wolna-Maruwka, A., and Niewiadomska, A. 2021. The significance of microbial transformation of nitrogen compounds in the light of integrated crop management. Agronomy, 11(7), 1415; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11071415.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGu, J. and Yang, J. 2022. Nitrogen (N) transformation in paddy rice field: Its effect on N uptake and relation to improved N management. \u003cem\u003eCrop and Environment\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e1\u003c/strong\u003e, 7-14.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHadjidemetriou, D. G. 1982. Comparative study of the determination of nitrates in calcareous soils by the ion-selective electrode, chromotropic acid and phenoldisulphonic acid methods. Analyst 107 (1270):25\u0026ndash;29.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHassan, M. U. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Management strategies to mitigate N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions in agriculture. \u003cem\u003eLife\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e12\u003c/strong\u003e, 439; https://doi.org/10.3390/life12030439 (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHe, T.H. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Effects of application of inhibitors and biochar to fertilizer on gaseous nitrogen emissions from an intensively managed wheat field. \u003cem\u003eSci. Total Environ\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e628\u003c/strong\u003e, 121-130 (2018).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. In Working Group, I contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report. (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2014) https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107415324.023. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJackson, M. Soil Chemical Analysis. Constable and Co. Ltd., London, UK. (1962).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJindo, K. \u003cem\u003eet al.\u003c/em\u003e Role of biochar in promoting circular economy in the agriculture sector. Part 1: A review of the biochar roles in soil N, P and K cycles. \u003cem\u003eChem. Biol. Technol. Agric\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e7\u003c/strong\u003e, 15; https://doi.org/10.1186/s40538-020-00182-8 (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKameyama, K., Miyamoto, T., Shiono, T. \u0026amp; Shinogi, Y. Influence of sugarcane bagasse-derived biochar application on nitrate leaching in calcaric dark red soil. \u003cem\u003eJ. Environ. Qual\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e41\u003c/strong\u003e, 1131-1137 (2012).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhan, S. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Biochar production and characteristics, its impacts on soil health, crop production, and yield enhancement: A review. \u003cem\u003ePlants\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e13, \u003c/strong\u003e166; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13020166 (2024). \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKhandey N. S., Anurag, R. N., Sengar, S. S. \u0026amp; Kumar, R. Response of applied neem coated urea (NCU) on yield and yield attributing parameters of rice (Oryza sativa L) in Vertisol. \u003cem\u003eInt. J. Chem. Stud\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e5\u003c/strong\u003e,1670\u0026ndash;1675 (2017).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKumar, R. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Influence of physicochemical parameters of neem (\u003cem\u003eAzadirachta indica\u003c/em\u003e A Juss) oils on nitrification inhibition in soil. \u003cem\u003eJ. Agric. Food Chem\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e55\u003c/strong\u003e, 1389-1393 (2007).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKundu, S. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Pine oleoresin: A potential urease inhibitor and coating material for slow-release urea. \u003cem\u003eCurr. Sci\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e104\u003c/strong\u003e, 1068-1071 (2013).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee, J., Choi, S., Lee, Y., \u0026amp; Kim, S. Y. (2021). Impact of manure compost amendments on NH3 volatilization in rice paddy ecosystems during cultivation. Environmental Pollution, 288, 117726.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi, Y., Huang, L., Zhang, H., Wang, M. \u0026amp; Z. Liang. Assessment of ammonia volatilization losses and nitrogen utilization during the rice growing season in alkaline salt-affected soils. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e9\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/em\u003e, 132; https://doi.org/10.3390/su9010132 (2017).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiu, X. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Comparing ammonia volatilization between conventional and slow-release nitrogen fertilizers in paddy fields in the Taihu Lake region. \u003cem\u003eEnviron. Sci. Pollut. Res\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e27\u003c/strong\u003e, 8386-8394 (2020).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiu, H., Zheng, X., Li, Y., Yu, J., Ding, H., Sveen, T. R., \u0026amp; Zhang, Y. (2022). Soil moisture determines nitrous oxide emission and uptake. Science of the Total Environment, 822, 153566.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLyu, U. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Reducing N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions with enhanced efficiency nitrogen fertilizers (EENFs) in a high-yielding spring maize system. \u003cem\u003eEnviron. Pollut\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e273\u003c/strong\u003e, 116422; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.116422 (2021).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMahmud, K., Panday, D., Mergoum, A. \u0026amp; Missaoui, A. Nitrogen losses and potential mitigation strategies for a sustainable agroecosystem. \u003cem\u003eSustainability. \u003cstrong\u003e13, \u003c/strong\u003e2400\u003cstrong\u003e;\u003c/strong\u003e \u003c/em\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su13042400 (2021).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMalinas, A. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Current status and future prospective for nitrogen use efficiency in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). \u003cem\u003ePlants\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cstrong\u003e11\u003c/strong\u003e, 217; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11020217 (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eManzoor, S. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Biochar and slow-releasing nitrogen fertilizers improved growth, nitrogen use, yield, and fiber quality of cotton under arid climatic conditions. \u003cem\u003eEnviron. Sci. Pollut. Res\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e29\u003c/strong\u003e, 13742-13755 (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMar\u0026iacute;n-Mart\u0026iacute;nez, A., Sanz-Cobena, A., Bustamante, M. A., Agullo, E. \u0026amp; Paredes, C. Effect of organic amendment addition on soil properties, greenhouse gas emissions and grape yield in semi-arid vineyard agroecosystems. Agronomy 11, 1477 (2021).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNash, P. R., Nelson, K. A., Motavallid, P. P. \u0026amp; Anderson, S. H. Corn yield response to managed drainage and polymer coated urea. \u003cem\u003eAgron. J\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e107\u003c/strong\u003e, 435-440 (2015).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNiu, Y. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Yield-scaled N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions were effectively reduced by biochar amendment of sandy loam soil under maize-wheat rotation in the North China Plain. \u003cem\u003eAtmos. Environ\u003c/em\u003e. 170, 58-70 (2017).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePage, A. L., Miller, R. H. \u0026amp; D.R. Keeney (eds.). Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties. ASA, SSSA, Madison, WI, USA. (1982)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRamalingappa, L. P. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Reducing options of ammonia volatilization and improving nitrogen use efficiency via organic and inorganic amendments in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). \u003cem\u003ePeerJ\u003c/em\u003e https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.14965 (2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRathnappriya, R. H. K. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Examination of the effectiveness of controlled release fertilizer to balance sugarcane yield and reduce nitrate leaching to groundwater. \u003cem\u003eAgronomy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e12\u003c/strong\u003e, 695; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12030695 (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRichards, L.A. Diagnosis and improvement of saline and alkali soils. USDA Agric. \u003cem\u003eHandbook 60\u003c/em\u003e. Washington, D. C. (1954).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShaaban, M. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Reduction in soil N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emissions by pH manipulation and enhanced nosZ gene transcription under different water regimes. \u003cem\u003eEnviron. Pollut\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e235\u003c/strong\u003e, 625-631 (2018).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShahzad, A. N., Qureshi, M. K., Wakeel, A. \u0026amp; Misselbrook, T. H. Crop production in Pakistan and low nitrogen use efficiencies. \u003cem\u003eNat. Sustain\u003c/em\u003e. 2, pp. 1106-1114 (2019).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSigurdarson, J. J., Svane, S., \u0026amp; Karring, H. (2018). The molecular processes of urea hydrolysis in relation to ammonia emissions from agriculture. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology, 17(2), 241-258.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSingh, B. Agronomic Benefits of Neem Coated Urea - A Review. Technical Report, Indian Fertilizer Association. doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.10647.98722 (2016).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSparks, D. L. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Methods of soil analysis: Part 3-chemical methods. Book Series Number 5. \u003cem\u003eSoil Sci. Soc. of Am., Am. Soc. of Agron\u003c/em\u003e; Madison, WI, USA. (1966).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTangarajan, R. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. The potential value of biochar in the mitigation of gaseous emission of nitrogen. \u003cem\u003eSci. Total Environ\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e612\u003c/strong\u003e, 257-268 (2018).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTian, X., Geng, J., Guo, Y., Li, C., Zhang, M. \u0026amp; Chen, J. Controlled-release urea decreased ammonia volatilization and increased nitrogen use efficiency of cotton. \u003cem\u003eJ. Plant Nut. Soil Sci\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e6\u003c/strong\u003e, 667-675 (2017).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTimilsina, S., Khanal, A. \u0026amp; Vista, S. P. Effect of neem oil coated and common urea with different nitrogen levels on rice yield and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) in Kaski, Nepal. \u003cem\u003eTURJFAS\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e11\u003c/strong\u003e, 1016\u0026ndash;1023; https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v11i6.1016-1023.5436 (2023).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, C. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Biochar-based slow-release of fertilizers for sustainable agriculture: A mini review. \u003cem\u003eEnviron. Sci. Ecotechnol\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e10\u003c/strong\u003e, 100167; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ese.2022.100167 (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWang, F. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Nitrogen application timing and levels affect the fate and budget of fertilizer nitrogen in the apple\u0026ndash;soil system. \u003cem\u003ePlants\u003c/em\u003e 2024, \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e, 813; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants13060813 (2024).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWhetton, R. L., Harty, M. A. \u0026amp; Holden, N. M. Communicating nitrogen loss mechanisms for improving nitrogen use efficiency management, focused on global wheat. \u003cem\u003eNitrogen\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e3\u003c/strong\u003e, 213\u0026ndash;246 (2022).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWoodley, A. L. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Ammonia volatilization, nitrous oxide emissions and corn yields as influenced by nitrogen placement and enhanced efficiency fertilizers. \u003cem\u003eSoil Sci. Soc. Am. J\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e84\u003c/strong\u003e, 1327- 1341 (2020).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYaseen, M. \u003cem\u003eet al\u003c/em\u003e. Subsurface-applied coated nitrogen fertilizer enhanced wheat production by improving nutrient-use efficiency with less ammonia volatilization. \u003cem\u003eAgronomy\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cstrong\u003e11\u003c/strong\u003e, 2396; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11122396 (2021).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":true,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"international-journal-of-environmental-research","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"IJER","sideBox":"Learn more about [International Journal of Environmental Research](https://www.springer.com/journal/41742)","snPcode":"41742","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/ijer/default2.asp...\n","title":"International Journal of Environmental Research","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Nitrogen use efficiency, Coated urea, Biochar, NH3 volatilization, N2O emissions, NO3 leaching","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4990321/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4990321/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"Excessive use of nitrogenous (N) fertilizers for intensified cropping has negative environmental impacts, including the emissions of nitrous oxide (N2O) and ammonia (NH3), as well as nitrate (NO3-) leaching, however, enhanced efficiency nitrogenous fertilizers (EENFs) could be an innovative and most effective option for minimizing N losses.This study evaluated the effects of various commercially available EENFs on N losses in a rice-wheat cropping system under both saturated and aerated conditions in various incubation and lysimeter experiments. The incubation study revealed that EENFs significantly reduced NH3 volatilization and N2O emissions with coated urea products like neem-coated urea, nutraful urea, biomaterials-coated urea, and zabardast urea, compared to standard uncoated urea at both 65% and 100% water-holding capacity. In lysimeter experiments, neem-coated urea and nutraful urea achieved the highest reductions in NH3 and N2O emissions, and NO3- leaching in both rice and wheat crops. Moreover, neem-coated urea increased partial N factor productivity and partial N balance in rice (10.04%, 20.12%) and wheat (7.92%, 21.61%), respectively. The integrated use of neem-coated urea and biochar was found to be the best, as it reduced the emissions of NH3 (26.16% and 28.57%) and N2O (24.28% and 28.04%), as well as the leaching of NO3- (23.53% and 14.55%) under rice and wheat crops, respectively. As countries are committed to halving N waste by 2030 under the UN Colombo Declaration, neem-coated urea coupled with biochar is the best option for minimizing N losses and enhancing N use efficiency.","manuscriptTitle":"Enhanced-efficiency nitrogenous fertilizers coupled with organic amendments: A sustainable approach to mitigating nitrogen emissions and leaching in rice-wheat cropping systems","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-12-18 17:44:46","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4990321/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"","date":"2024-12-16T19:34:48+00:00","index":0,"fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-12-16T15:14:28+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-12-14T14:12:17+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"International Journal of Environmental Research","date":"2024-12-14T07:16:12+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"decision","content":"Minor revisions","date":"2024-11-30T03:36:35+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"international-journal-of-environmental-research","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"IJER","sideBox":"Learn more about [International Journal of Environmental Research](https://www.springer.com/journal/41742)","snPcode":"41742","submissionUrl":"https://www.editorialmanager.com/ijer/default2.asp...\n","title":"International Journal of Environmental Research","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"97f5692c-3b35-4de3-87f7-31605a838005","owner":[],"postedDate":"December 18th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-06-02T16:06:09+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-4990321","link":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-025-00801-y","journal":{"identity":"international-journal-of-environmental-research","isVorOnly":false,"title":"International Journal of Environmental Research"},"publishedOn":"2025-05-26 15:57:45","publishedOnDateReadable":"May 26th, 2025"},"versionCreatedAt":"2024-12-18 17:44:46","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1007/s41742-025-00801-y","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-025-00801-y","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4990321","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4990321","identity":"rs-4990321","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}