Effects of Liquid Urea Rates on Nitrogen Dynamics, Growth, and Yield of Grain Corn (Zea Mays L.)

Effects of Liquid Urea Rates on Nitrogen Dynamics, Growth, and Yield of Grain Corn (Zea Mays L.) | 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 Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Effects of Liquid Urea Rates on Nitrogen Dynamics, Growth, and Yield of Grain Corn (Zea Mays L.) Ahmmed Md Motasim, Abd. Wahid Samsuri, Arina Shairah Abdul Sukor, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4267799/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 9 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Arbitrary use of urea fertilizer reduces nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) and increases the risk of environmental pollution. An experiment was conducted at the Universiti Putra Malaysia from November 2019 to March 2020 to evaluate the application methods and rates of liquid urea(LU) on the yield performance of corn. The treatments were, U0 = control, GU100 = Granular urea(GU) 100%, LU100 = LU 100%, LU50 = LU 50% and LU33 = LU 33%, in two equal splits at 10th and 28th days after sowing (DAS) in randomized completely block design, replicates four. Results showed that plant height (206.99cm, 216.92cm, 214.61cm), ear height (88.13cm, 88.63cm, 86.00cm), days of maturity (88.75, 89.00, 86.75), number of seeds per kernel row (32.25, 34.50, 33.75), fresh cob weight (10886.60kg/ha, 10946.60kg/ha, 10927.93kg/ha) and 100-grain weight (20.51g, 22.50 g, 21.39 g) of corn were not different significantly(p ≤ 0.05) in GU100, LU100 and LU50 treatments, respectively. The highest yield of corn was found with LU100 (6249.03kg/ha) treatment whereas the yield in LU50 (5666.50kg/ha) and GU100 (5746.64kg/ha) were not different significantly. Nitrogen(%) in plants was the highest in LU100 followed by LU50 treatment which was significantly higher than GU100 treatment. The total N content was also the highest in LU100 (102.83kg/ha) though the total N content was not different significantly in LU50 (77.62kg/ha) and GU100 (83.84kg/ha) treatments. The NUE was the highest in LU50 (66.92%) treatment followed by LU100 (51.47%) treatment. The results of the study suggested that the LU100 was the best application rate while LU50 treatment was comparable to GU100 in corn cultivation. Liquid urea granular urea NUE grain corn Introduction Corn ( Zea mays L) is the largest cereal crop after wheat and rice, adopted to grow under diverse climatic conditions and soils all over the world. It is a multipurpose crop used for food, feed, and even raw materials for biofuel production [ 9 , 30 , 48 ]. Nitrogen management in sustainable corn production is not only essential but also a challenging job. Optimum N application significantly increases crop production, but the application of excess N fertilizers leads to low NUE and high N losses (e.g., leaching), which is a possible reason for economic and environmental imbalance, and it causes waste of resources and environmental degradation [ 20 ]. Urea is the most important N fertilizer, which plays a vital role in global crop production and food security. Usually, farmers are overusing N fertilizers, particularly synthetic nitrogenous fertilizers like urea, to achieve higher crop production [ 19 , 22 ]. Yet, there has been no consistent crop yield increment resulting from the increased N fertilizer application [ 51 ]. This excess N fertilizer causes lower NUE, lowers farm income, and causes water pollution, atmospheric disruption and soil health degradation [ 10 , 13 ]. Thus, efficient management of N fertilizer is very important to sustain crop yields and maintain soil quality and reduce environmental threats [ 40 ]. The improvement of NUE depends on effective N management, which is the combination of using suitable N sources, appropriate application doses, correct placement, and the timing of fertilizer application [ 10 , 29 ]. Liquid urea has the potential to be an alternate source of N for improving crop yield. Its application resulted in higher N mineralization, exchangeable NH 4 + concentration, yield and NUE of corn while reduced N loss (e.g., N 2 O emission, NH 3 volatilization and Nitrate leaching) than GU application [ 24 , 27 ]. Liquid urea can disperse throughout the soil profile and therefore improves the adsorption capacity of NH 4 + by the soil particles, which will reduce the further conversion of NH 4 + and retain more N for better availability to the crops [ 39 ]. Some researchers recommended LU be used during a warm period of the growing season to reduce gaseous losses. The application of LU recovered N deficiency quickly and gave a better performance for profitable cereal production than GU due to the lower risk of loss and its rapid availability to the crops [ 23 , 50 ] . Excess use of N fertilizer and faulty application methods lead to lower NUE and higher N loss potential (e.g., nitrate leaching), resulting in huge environmental problems [ 10 , 21 , 35 ]. Liquid urea (e.g., UAN) application reduced total N loss more than GU and recorded about 70% higher uptake efficiency than ammonium nitrate. In addition, LU application significantly minimized the N leaching and GHGs gases (e.g., N 2 O) emission compared to GU [ 45 , 49 ]. Liquid N fertilizer application resulted in 19% higher NUE than GU in winter wheat and maintained equilibrium in the soil-crop nutrient mechanism for gradual N uptake by the plant [ 8 , 23 ]. No urea fertilizer management method can effectively increase the NUE and yield of grain corn. A significant part of applied N remained unexplained due to diversified losses and low uptake potential. It is crucial to increase the N availability of applied urea fertilizer, which can increase the N uptake by the plant. Liquid urea can distributes rapidly throughout the soil profile and reduce the possible loss potential, which increases the N availability to the plant. The experiment was conducted to investigate the application methods and rates of LU on the growth, development and yield of grain corn and to directly compare the efficiency of LU and GU application on the growth, development and yield of grain corn. Materials and Methods Set up of the experiment The pot experiment was conducted in the New Glasshouse (03̊ 00́ 12.6̋ N; 101̊ 47́ 22.4̋ E), Ladang 15, Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia during November 2019 to March 2020. The location experienced an average yearly rainfall of about 2000 mm along with the temperature ranges between 19℃ and 36°C and relative humidity 80–90%. The clay loam soil (Bungor soil series) was collected from Jalan Pertanian, UPM Campus, Puchong (03̊ 00̋ 12.6́ N; 101̊ 47̋ 22.4́ E) and the physicochemical properties of the soil were described in the Table 1 . Table 1 Fertilizer treatments of the experiment Values Method References Soil properties Bungor soil series USDA Taxonomic class very fine, kaolinitic, isohypertermic, haplic hapludoxs, typic paleudult, Ultisols [ 33 , 42 ] USDA soil texture class Sandy clay loam Sand (%) 69.28 ± 0.021 [ 47 ] Silt (%) 2.28 ± 0.003 Clay (%) 28.44 ± 0.21 Moisture content at field capacity (%) 23.74 ± 0.051 [ 37 ] pH 4.93 ± 0.21 (Jones, 2001; Sharifuddin et al., 1990) Total C (%) 1.41 ± 0.041 [ 18 ] Total N (%) 0.07 ± 0.003 NH 4 + - N (mg/kg) 16.31 ± 0.25 [ 12 , 16 ] NO 3 − - N (mg/kg) 11.41 ± 0.042 CEC (cmol c /kg) 5.78 ± 0.12 [ 4 , 16 ] Exchangeable K (cmol c / kg) 0.21 ± 0.003 [ 43 ] Exchangeable Ca (cmol c/ /kg) 1.41 ± 0.024 Exchangeable Mg (cmol c /kg) 0.44 ± 0.008 Exchangeable Al (cmol c /kg) 2.37 ± 0.031 Available P (mg /kg) 5.03 ± 0.012 About 18 kg of clean, sieved soil was filled into polybags (18̋ x 20̋), and the moisture content was maintained at field capacity. Three corn seeds were sown in the polybag, and thinning was done after germination, keeping only one healthy and vigorous seedling per polybag arranged according to the Randomized Completely Block Design (RCBD). The treatments used in this study were as shown in Table 2 . Table 2 Fertilizer treatments of the experiment Label Fertilizer treatment U0 No urea (control) GU100 Granular urea 100% in two equal splits at 10th and 28th DAS LU100 Liquid urea 100% in two equal splits at 10th and 28th DAS LU50 Liquid urea 50% in two equal splits at 10th and 28th DAS LU33 Liquid urea 33% in two equal splits at 10th and 28th DAS Fertilizer and agronomic management The recommended fertilizer rate of 140 kg/ha N, 100 kg/ha P 2 O 5 and 120 kg/ha K 2 O were applied [ 14 ]. The full amounts of urea, triple superphosphate (TSP), and muriate of potash (MoP) were 5.70g, 4.13g and 3.74 g per polybag, respectively. Triple superphosphate and MoP were incorporated into the soil 48 hours before seed sowing. The urea amount was applied to the plant according to the fertilizer treatment (Table 2 ). The first dose of N was applied at 10 DAS. Water was added every morning to maintain field capacity moisture level. Weeding was done manually if weed was present. Data collection and processing The soil and plant samples were analysed for total N using the dry combustion method on a TruMac, LECO Corporation, USA [ 18 ] CNS analyser, cation exchange capacity (CEC) was determined using the leaching method [ 4 ], NH 4 + -N and NO 3 − -N concentrations were estimated by distillation method [ 15 ], soil particle distribution was determined using the pipette method [ 47 ], gravimetric water content was determined at field capacity [ 46 ], and pH was determined in 2.5 (soil: water) ratio and measured using Metrohm827 pH meter (Metrohm AG, Switzerland). The properties of soil are shown in Table 1 . The yield contributing parameters and yield data were collected. The N uptake by the biomass, grain and stover were analyzed. The total N content (kg/ha) in the plant was calculated [ 6 ] by multiplying the grain and stover dry yield (kg/ha) with the N content (mg/kg). Total N content (kg/ha) = N content(mg/kg) X Yield{grain and stover(kg/ha)} 1000000 NUE (%) = 100 X Total N uptake – Total N uptake by the control plant Amount of urea applied Statistical Analysis The recorded data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) for a factorial experimental design using Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) [ 41 ] and mean comparisons were analyzed using the least significance difference test (LSD) at 5% level of significance. Results Plant growth parameters and N content at 50 DAS The plant growth parameters of grain corn receiving LU and GU urea treatments at 50 DAS are shown in Table 3 . There was no significant difference in plant height among the fertilized plants, but they were significantly higher than the U0 (control) treatment. There was also no significant difference in stem diameter among all the treatments. The SPAD value of the control plant differed significantly from the fertilizer treated plant, where the highest SPAD value was recorded from the LU100 (54.35), it was not significantly different from GU100 (52.55) treatment. On the other hand, LU50 (47.93) was not significantly different from the GU100 (52.55) treatment, but LU33 was lower than GU100. The lowest SPAD value was recorded from U0 (39.73), but it was not significantly different from LU33 (44.10) treatment. There was a significant difference among treatments in the fresh biomass of corn at 50 DAS. The fresh biomass production was the highest in LU100 (394.50 g), which was 13.86% higher than GU100 (346.47 g) treatment. On the other hand, the fresh biomass production in GU100 and LU50 treatments was not significantly different. The lowest fresh biomass was recorded from U0 (181.49 g), followed by LU33 (321.41 g) treatment. Table 3 Growth parameters of grain corn at 50 DAS (Mean ± SE) Treatment Plant height (cm) Stem diameter (cm) Chlorophyll content (SPAD value) Fresh biomass (g) U0 186.80 ± 2.02 b* 1.60 ± 0.02 39.73 ± 0.59 d 181.49 ± 4.85 d GU100 206.99 ± 1.65 a 1.79 ± 0.02 52.55 ± 0.45 ab 346.47 ± 9.47 b LU100 216.92 ± 1.61 a 1.84 ± 0.19 54.35 ± 0.46 a 394.50 ± 9.04 a LU50 214.61 ± 2.29 a 1.79 ± 0.14 47.93 ± 0.35 bc 355.45 ± 8.46 b LU33 212.38 ± 1.48 a 1.76 ± 0.09 44.10 ± 0.39 cd 321.41 ± 7.71 c LSD 0.05 11.2 NS 4.7311 24.009 CV (%) 1.77 13.33 1.80 4.98 *Different letters within the column indicate significant differences between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p ≤ 0.05). The results on the dry matter, %N content, total N content in plant and NUE of grain corn at 50 DAS have shown in Table 4 . There was no significant difference in dry matter production among the fertilized plants, but all of them differed significantly from the control treatment. The dry matter production in the LU100 treatment was 55.53 g/plant, and the lowest (28.44 g/plant) dry matter was recorded from the U0 (control) treatment. The highest %N content was recorded in LU100 (1.73%) followed by the other treatment, but they were significantly different from the other fertilized treatments. The lowest %N content was recorded from the U0 (1.24%) treatment. Similarly, the highest total N content in the plant was recorded in LU100 (0.960 g), but it was significantly different from LU50 (0.864 g) treatment. In addition, total N content in GU100, LU50 and LU33 were as par as they were not significantly different. The NUE was the highest in the LU33 (25.05%) treatment, followed by LU50 (18.04%) treatment. The NUE values in GU100 and LU100 were not significantly different, the LU50 treatment recorded 107.59% higher NUE than GU100. Table 4 N content (%) and NUE of grain corn at 50 DAS (Mean ± SE) Treatment Dry matter (g/plant) % N content/plant Total N content (g)/plant NUE (%) U0 28.44 ± 0.94 b* 1.24 ± 0.04 c 0.352 ± 0.02 c - GU100 54.24 ± 1.43 a 1.56 ± 0.04 b 0.847 ± 0.04 b 8.69 ± 1.01 c LU100 55.54 ± 1.19 a 1.73 ± 0.05 a 0.960 ± 0.04 a 10.67 ± 0.82 c LU50 55.24 ± 1.61 a 1.57 ± 0.03 b 0.864 ± 0.04 ab 18.04 ± 3.61 b LU33 53.05 ± 1.31 a 1.56 ± 0.04 b 0.828 ± 0.03 b 25.05 ± 2.96 a LSD 0.05 3.9627 0.1168 0.0994 0.7257 CV (%) 5.33 5.07 8.56 15.52 *Different letters within the column indicate significant differences between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p ≤ 0.05). Growth parameters at maturity The results of plant growth parameters at the mature stage of the corn are shown in Table 5 . There was no significant difference in GU100 (229.75 cm), LU100 (232.50 cm) and LU50 (226.25 cm) treatments in terms of plant height, but they were significantly higher than LU33 and U0 (control) treatment. The lowest plant height was recorded from the U0 treatment. On the other hand, the U0 (197.00 cm) treatment was not significantly different from LU33 (214.25 cm) treatment. The highest leaf number was recorded from the LU100 (10.50) and the LU50 (10.25) treatments, while the lowest leaf number was recorded from the U0 (7.25) and LU33 (7.50) treatments. There were not significantly different in stem diameter and ear height among the treatments. Table 5 Plant height, No. of leaf, stem diameter and ear height of grain corn at the mature stage (Mean ± SE) Treatment Plant height (cm) No. of leaf/plant Stem diameter (cm) Ear height (cm) U0 197.00 ± 3.35 b* 7.25 ± 0.48 c 1.63 ± 0.05 85.75 ± 2.90 GU100 229.75 ± 4.36 a 9.25 ± 0.25 b 1.78 ± 0.03 88.13 ± 4.05 LU100 232.50 ± 3.91 a 10.50 ± 0.29 a 1.87 ± 0.19 88.63 ± 4.12 LU50 226.25 ± 3.67 a 10.25 ± 0.25 a 1.86 ± 0.14 86.00 ± 3.67 LU33 214.25 ± 3.47 b 7.50 ± 0.28 c 1.64 ± 0.09 85.88 ± 2.68 LSD 0.05 10.824 0.9435 NS NS CV (%) 4.85 7.21 13.37 8.16 *Different letters within the column indicate significant differences between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p ≤ 0.05). Yield and yield contributing parameters at maturity The results of ear length, days of maturity and fresh cob weight are tabulated in Table 6 . The ear lengths in GU100 (22.25 cm), LU100 (22.88 cm), and LU50 (21.75 cm) treatments were not significantly different, and they were significantly higher than in LU33 (18.25 cm) treatment. Furthermore, the LU33 treatment was higher than the U0 (control) treatment in terms of ear length. There was no significant difference among the fertilized plant in the duration of maturity, but LU100 and GU100 were significantly higher than the U0 (control) treatment. The fresh cob weight of GU100 (10866.60 kg/ha), LU100 (10946.60 kg/ha), and LU50 (10927.93 kg/ha) were not significantly different, but they were significantly higher than LU33 (7519.96 kg/ha) treatment. On the other hand, the fresh cob weight of the LU33 treatment was significantly higher than the U0 (5079.97 kg/ha) treatment. Table 6 Ear length, days of maturity and fresh cob weight of grain corn at the mature stage (Mean ± SE) Treatment Ear length (cm) Days of maturity (days) Fresh cob weight (kg/ ha) U0 14.75 ± 0.72 c* 84.50 ± 1.50 b 5079.97 ± 121.96 GU100 22.25 ± 0.27 a 88.75 ± 2.63 a 10866.60 ± 185.23 LU100 22.88 ± 1.13 a 89.00 ± 3.02 a 10946.60 ± 181.35 LU50 21.75 ± 0.25 a 86.75 ± 2.25 ab 10927.93 ± 290.05 LU33 18.25 ± 0.25 b 86.50 ± 2.50 ab 7519.96 ± 367.57 LSD 0.05 1.899 3.7024 739.97 CV (%) 6.31 2.51 5.41 *Different letters within the column indicate significant differences between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p ≤ 0.05). The results of fresh stover weight, dry stover weight, grain weight and husk weight of grain corn at the mature stage are listed in Table 7 . The highest fresh stover weight/plant was recorded from LU100 (281.48 g) treatment which was 22.08% higher than GU100 (230.63 g) treatment. The fresh stover weight in LU50 (213.46 g) and LU33 (198.41 g) were not significantly different. The lowest fresh stover weight was recorded in the U0 (185.51 g) treatment which was as par with the LU33 (198.41 g) treatment as they were not significantly different. The dry stover weight/ha was also a similar trend to fresh stover production. The dry stover weight/ha was the highest in the LU100 (5663.40 kg) treatment which was 8.74% higher than GU100 (5208.10 kg) treatment. Dry stover weight in LU50 (4735.44 kg) and LU33 (4506.77 kg) were not significantly different, but they were significantly higher than in U0 (3824.10 kg) treatment. The highest grain weight/plant was recorded from LU100 (102.17 g), followed by GU100 (94.89 g) and LU50 (92.75 g) treatments. However, GU100 and LU50 were not significantly different. The grain weight/plant in LU100 was 7.67% higher than in GU 100 treatment. The lowest grain weight/plant was recorded in U0 (39.50 g), followed by LU33 (65.10 g) treatment. The highest husk weight/ ha was recorded in the LU100 (1346.66 kg), which was 22.83% higher than GU100 (1096.33 kg) treatment. Husk weight/ha in GU100 (1096.33 kg) and LU50 (1093.33 kg) treatments were not significantly different, while the lowest husk weight/ha were recorded in LU33 (720.00 kg) and U0 (613.06 kg) treatments. Table 7 Fresh stover weight, dry stover weight, grain weight and husk weight of grain corn at the mature stage (Mean ± SE) Treatment Fresh stover weight (g/plant) Dry stover weight (kg/ha) Grin weight (g/plant) Husk weight (kg/ha) U0 185.51 ± 4.65 d* 3824.11 ± 210.74 d 39.50 ± 1.94 d 613.06 ± 30.26 c GU100 230.63 ± 5.85 b 5208.10 ± 216.71 b 94.89 ± 1.52 b 1093.33 ± 63.48 b LU100 281.48 ± 7.88 a 5663.43 ± 157.43 a 102.17 ± 2.18 a 1346.66 ± 59.13 a LU50 213.46 ± 4.34 c 4735.44 ± 200.27 c 92.75 ± 1.93 b 1093.33 ± 63.48 b LU33 198.41 ± 4.39 cd 4506.77 ± 153.76 c 65.10 ± 1.48 c 720.00 ± 55.51 c LSD 0.05 16.84 417.95 5.5138 168.12 CV (%) 5.03 5.79 4.64 11.46 *Different letters within the column indicate significant difference between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p ≤ 0.05). The results of kernel rows, number of seed/row, 100-grain weight, and grain yield are presented in Table 8 . The number of kernel rows was not significantly different among the treatments. The highest number of seeds/ row was recorded in LU100 (34.50) treatment which were not significantly different from GU100 (32.25) and LU50 (33.75). On the other hand, GU100, LU50 and LU 33 were not significantly different, but they were significantly higher than the U0 (control) treatment. The lowest number of seeds per row was recorded from the U0 (19.25) treatment. The 100-grain weight in the fertilized plant was significantly higher than the U0 (control) treatment. 100-grain weight in the LU100 (22.50 g), LU50 (21.39 g), and GU100 (20.51 g) treatments were not significantly different. On the other hand, the 100-seed weight of the treatment GU100 and LU33 were not significantly different. The lowest 100-grain weight resulted from U0 (14.75 g) treatment followed by LU33 (18.50 g) treatment. The grain yield was the highest in the LU100 (6249.03 kg/ha) treatment which was 8.70% and 10.22% higher than GU100 and LU50 treatments. Nonetheless, the grain yield in GU100 (5746.64 kg/ha) was not significantly different from the LU50 (5666.50 kg/ha) treatment. Table 8 Kernel rows, No. of seed/row, 100-seed and grain yield of grain corn at the mature stage (Mean ± SE) Treatment Kernel rows (No.) No. of seed/ row 100-grain weight (g) Grain yield (kg/ha) U0 12.50 ± 1.26 19.25 ± 1.44 c* 14.75 ± 0.95 c 2906.65 ± 228.87 d GU100 14.00 ± 0.82 32.25 ± 1.55 ab 20.51 ± 0.96 ab 5746.64 ± 102.99 b LU100 14.00 ± 0.50 34.50 ± 1.85 a 22.50 ± 0.96 a 6249.03 ± 41.60 a LU50 13.25 ± 0.50 33.75 ± 2.50 ab 21.39 ± 0.37 a 5666.50 ± 59.22 b LU33 13.25 ± 0.63 28.75 ± 0.95 b 18.50 ± 0.96 b 4271.98 ± 78.69 c LSD 0.05 NS 5.22 2.62 367.75 CV (%) 11.71 11.66 8.90 4.91 *Different letters within the column indicate significant difference between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p ≤ 0.05). NS = Not significant. N content and NUE of grain corn at maturity The %N in stover, grain, total N content in plant and NUE are stated in Table 9 . The %N content in the stover in the LU100 (0.655%) and GU100 (0.659%) treatments were not significantly different, but they were significantly higher than LU50 (0.492%) treatment. The highest %N content in the grain was recorded from LU100 (1.489%) among the treatments, followed by LU50 (1.274%). The %N content by the grain in LU50 (1.274%) was even higher than in GU100 (1.159%) treatments. The %N content grain in LU100 and LU50 was 28.47% and 9.92% higher than GU100 treatment, respectively. The highest total N content in the plant was recorded in LU100 treatment (102.83 kg/ha), followed by GU100 (82.84 kg/ha) and LU50 (77.62 kg/ha) treatments. In addition, the total N content in the LU100 treatment was 24.15% higher than in the GU100 treatment. The total N content in GU100 and LU50 was not significantly different, but they were higher than LU33 (46.83 kg/ha) treatment. The lowest total N content was recorded in U0 (30.78 kg/ha) treatment, followed by LU33. The NUE was highest in LU50 treatment (66.92%), followed by LU100 (51.47%). The NUE in the LU50 treatment was 79.94% higher than the GU100 treatment. Table 9 %N in stover, grain, total N content in plant and NUE of grain corn at the mature stage (Mean ± SE) Treatment % N in stover % N in grain Total N content in plant (kg/ha) NUE (%) U0 0.345 ± 0.019 c* 0.917 ± 0.03 d 30.78 ± 1.92 d - GU100 0.659 ± 0.010 a 1.159 ± 0.04 c 82.84 ± 2.87 b 37.19 ± 1.93 c LU100 0.655 ± 0.004 a 1.489 ± 0.04 a 102.83 ± 1.93 a 51.47 ± 0.82 b LU50 0.492 ± 0.0178 b 1.274 ± 0.03 b 77.62 ± 1.07 b 66.92 ± 2.47 a LU33 0.358 ± 0.005 c 0.966 ± 0.02 d 46.83 ± 1.05 c 34.40 ± 2.94 c LSD 0.05 0.031 0.095 5.704 6.756 CV (%) 4.15 5.44 5.55 9.23 *Different letters within the column indicate significant difference between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p ≤ 0.05). . Total N (%) content of post-harvest soil The nitrogen content (%) of post-harvest soil is presented in Table 10 . The N content in LU100 (0.073%), GU100 (0.073%) and LU50 (0.067%) treatment was not significantly different though they were significantly higher than in U0 (control) and LU33 treatments. The lowest N content of post-harvest soil was found in U0 (0.052%) and LU33 (0.055%) treatments. Table 10 Total N content of post-harvest soil Treatment Total N content (%) U0 0.052 ± 0.003 b* GU100 0.074 ± 0.002 a LU100 0.073 ± 0.002 a LU50 0.067 ± 0.003 a LU33 0.055 ± 0.003 b LSD 0.05 0.0075 CV (%) 7.69 *Different letters within the column indicate significant differences between means using the least significant deference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p ≤ 0.05). Discussion The results of the study revealed that the yield contributing parameters and yield of grain corn was significantly different between the application of LU and GU. The SPAD value, fresh biomass and N content were highest in the LU100 treatment while harvested at 50 DAS among all the treatments. Besides, LU50 treatment was not significantly different from GU100, even when half of the recommended dose was used. Possibly, the LU treatments provided more available N for the plant for uptake and fewer N losses than GU, which promoted the corn plant to take up a greater amount of N than GU applications; meanwhile, GU had higher N loss, as it was reported about 10–80% N loss from applied urea remain unexplained [ 25 ]. The higher N uptake promoted higher growth and development, and the higher growth enabled higher biomass production. The higher growth also increased the yield contributing parameters and finally increased the yield of the crop. The LU-treated plant might have received more available N, which increased the N uptake by the corn plant and increased the N content in the plant. Biomass production is positively associated with growth and N uptake rate by the plant [ 25 , 26 , 31 ]. At the mature stage, the yield components such as ear length and fresh cob weight in LU50 were as par with GU100 as they were not significantly different even when only half of the recommended urea dose was applied. Due to the higher availability of N and lower N loss, the plant in LU50 treatment could take up a higher amount of N. The increased N content in the plant led to increased yield ultimately [ 1 , 2 ]. Other researchers reported that less biomass production was recorded (260.86 g/plant and 266.59 g/plant ) when N was applied at a lower rate (70 kg/ha and 140 kg/ha) due to lower N availability and uptake (2.12 g N/plant and 2.58 g N/plant) against plant demand [ 38 ]. However, this was not observed for LU applied at 50% of the recommended dosage. The LU100 treatment produced the highest grain yield as the growth and development of the corn plant was also higher. The balanced N concentration in plants promotes greater protein synthesis, which can be stored in the grain [ 5 , 28 ]. In addition, grain yield in LU50 was not significantly different from the GU100 application which indicates that most of the N in GU100 was lost. There is a directly proportional relationship between N source and corn development [ 32 ]. Liquid urea was reported to increase plant N uptake potential, which significantly affected the grain yield of corn [ 3 , 8 , 25 ]. Liquid urea application has also been reported to increase grain yield by 15–20% due to higher N availability than GU [ 17 , 26 , 44 ]. The higher plant N uptake by the LU-treated crops was due to the higher urea mineralization and adsorption of N by the soil particles, which increases N availability and reduces N losses (e.g., gaseous and leaching), where, the gaseous (NH 3 and N 2 O) losses and leaching loss were significantly lower in LU-treated soil than that of GU at same application rate [ 24 , 27 ]. Nitrogen content in the plant is directly related to biomass production and N concentration in the plant. In this study, the highest total N content in the plant was recorded in the LU100 treatment. On the other hand, the N content in GU100 and LU50 was as par as they were not significantly different, as the LU treated plant received more available N for uptake and lower N losses than the GU treated plant. Singh et al. [ 44 ] recorded a higher N uptake in LU applied crops compared to GU because of higher N availability. Moreover, Mueller and Vyn [ 28 ] obtained higher biomass production in the surface-banded UAN (a liquid N fertilizer) than in the surface application of urea, as urea had experienced greater gaseous loss. Nitrogen use efficiency will be higher if N is more available, while N losses are lower because of the higher N uptake potential of the crop. It is directly proportional to total biomass production and its N content. In LU50, NUE was the highest (66.92%) as a lower N rate (50% of recommendation) was used, but the yield (5666.50 kg/ha) was statistically similar to GU100 (5746.64 kg/ha. Granular urea application increased the N loss and reduced the N availability to the plant [ 25 , 36 , 44 ]. Liquid urea application improves NUE by decreasing N losses as LU can be dispersed throughout the rhizosphere and reduces the risk of N loss increasing the N availability and uptake potential of the crops [ 34 , 52 ]. Corn is a crop with high nutrient demand, and N is the most significant nutrient that influences crop productivity [ 7 ]; therefore, the soil cannot maintain optimum N in the soil applied with a lower N application rate or when applied in areas prone to N losses. The plant N content and N uptake by the plants depend on the demand and availability of N in the soil. The N demand in corn depends on its growing stages, and N availability depends on its soil adsorption and loss minimization processes. The fast mineralization of N reduces N losses and rapidly supplies N to plants, which will increase NUE and reduce the risk of environmental contamination. Optimum N management increases farm income by lowering fertilizer input cost, plant protection cost, and increasing grain quality. Conclusion The grain yield in GU100 and LU50 treatments were not significantly different, though; the grain yield was the highest in the LU100 treatment. The highest total N content (N uptake) was recorded in the LU100 treatment. The total N content in GU100 and LU50 were not significantly different. The NUE was highest in LU50 treatment, followed by LU100 treatment. So the LU100 treatment might be yield effective. In conclusion, the efficiency of LU was higher than GU in terms of the growth and development of grain corn. Further field assessment is necessary to conform to the findings Declarations Conflict of interest: The author has no potential conflict of interest regarding publishing the manuscript. Author Contribution All authors contributed effectively to develop, procedure and writing—reviewing and editing this manuscript. Ahmmed Md Motasim conducted the experiment, investigation, formal analysis, visualization,and writing the original draft of the manuscript. Editing and approval of final version of themanuscript by Abd. Wahid Samsuri, Arina Shairah Abdul Sukor, Amaily Akter and Adibah Mohd. Amin. All authors have read and agreed to the published the manuscript. Acknowledgments This work is a part PhD research in Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), Malaysia. The authors thankful to the UPM, Malaysia and Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC), Bangladesh for their cordial and fruitful supports. The authors are also grateful to the Ministry of Agriculture, the People's Republic of Bangladesh, and the Soil Resource Development Institute (SRDI). Data Availability This experiment is a part of the PhD work of the first author while doing research at Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia. Funding was gained during research but not any for article processing. References Abbasi FF, Baloch MA, Wagan KH, Shah A. N, Rajpar I (2010) Growth and Yield of okra Under Foliar Application of Some New Multinutrient. Pakistan J 0f Agric Agric Eng Vet Sci 26:11–18 Abbasi MK, Tahir MM, Sadiq A, Iqbal M, Zafar M (2012) Yield and Nitrogen Use Efficiency of Rainfed Maize Response to Splitting and Nitrogen Rates in Kashmir, Pakistan. Agron J 104:448–457. doi: 10.2134/agronj2011.0267 Adhikari P, Baral BR, Shrestha J (2016) Maize response to time of nitrogen application and planting seasons. J Maize Res Dev 2:83–93. doi: dx.doi.org/10.3126/jmrd.v2i1.16218 Chapman HD (1965) Cation-exchange capacity. Wiley Online Library Culman S, Thomison P (2020) When Is It Too Late to Fertilize Corn with Nitrogen? In: Agron. Crop. Netw.. Ohio State Univ. Extension.OSU.EDU. https://agcrops.osu.edu/newsletter/corn-newsletter/2015-20/when-it-too-late-fertilize-corn-nitro . Accessed 4 Aug 2020 Eagle AJ, Bird JA, Horwath WR, Linquist BA, Brouder SM, Hill JE, Van Kessel C (2000) Rice yield and nitrogen utilization efficiency under alternative straw management practices. Agron J 92:1096–1103. doi: 10.2134/agronj2000.9261096x Franzluebbers AJ (2017) Ecology: Cycling of carbon and nitrogen. In: Lal R (ed) Encyclopedia of Soil Science, 3rd ed. CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, FL, USA, pp 711–715 Holloway RE, Bertrand I, Frischke AJ, Brace DM, Mclaughlin MJ (2001) Improving fertiliser efficiency on calcareous and alkaline soils with fluid sources of P, N and Zn. Plant Soil 209–219 Huma B, Hussain M, Ning C, Yuesuo Y (2019) Human Benefits from Maize Article Information. Sch J Appl Sci Res 2:1–7 Jiang C, Lu D, Zu C, Shen J, Wang S, Guo Z, Zhou J, Wang H (2018) One-time root-zone N fertilization increases maize yield, NUE and reduces soil N losses in lime concretion black soil. Sci Rep 8:1–10. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-28642-0 Jones JB (2001) Laboratory guide for conducting soil tests and plant analysis. CRC press, Boca Raton, FL CRC Press United States US Junejo N, Khanif MY, Hanfi MM, Dharejo KA, Wan ZWY (2011) Reduced loss of NH3 by coating urea with biodegradable polymers, palm stearin and selected micronutrients. African J Biotechnol 10:10618–10625. doi: 10.5897/AJB10.394 Kanter DR, Zhang X, Mauzerall DL (2015) Reducing nitrogen pollution while decreasing farmers’ costs and increasing fertilizer industry profits. J Environ Qual 44:325–335 Kashiani P (2012) Genetic Potential of Selected Sweet Corn Inbred Lines and Analysis of Their Combining Ability Assisted by Microsatellite DNA Markers. PhD Thesis, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia Keeney DR (1983) Nitrogen—availability indices. In: Page AL (ed) Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 2nd ed. Wiley Online Library, pp 711–733 Keeney DR, Nelson. DW (1982) Nitrogen—Inorganic Forms. Methods soil Anal Part 2 Chem Microbiol Prop 5:643–698 Kubešová K, Balik J, Sedlář O, Peklova L (2013) The effect of injection application of ammonium fertilizer on the yield of maize. Sci Agric Bohem 44:1–5 LECO. (2018) LECO Corporation, USA. https://www.leco.com/about-us/corporate/approved-methods . Accessed 30 Nov 2018 Liang B, Zhao W, Yang X, Zhou J (2013) Fate of nitrogen-15 as influenced by soil and nutrient management history in a 19-year wheat–maize experiment. F Crop Res 144:126–134 Liu Z, Sun K, Liu W, Gao T, Li G, Han H, Li Z, Ning T (2020) Responses of soil carbon, nitrogen, and wheat and maize productivity to 10 years of decreased nitrogen fertilizer under contrasting tillage systems. Soil Tillage Res 196:104444. doi: 10.1016/j.still.2019.104444 Lv H, He P, Zhao S (2024) Optimized Nitrogen Fertilization Promoted Soil Organic Carbon Accumulation by Increasing Microbial Necromass Carbon in Potato Continuous Cropping Field. Agronomy 14:1–12. doi: 10.3390/agronomy14020307 Ma L, Li Y, Wei J, Li Z, Li H, Li Y, Zheng F, Liu Z, Tan D (2024) The Long-Term Application of Controlled-Release Nitrogen Fertilizer Maintains a More Stable Bacterial Community and Nitrogen Cycling Functions Than Common Urea in Fluvo-Aquic Soil. Agronomy 14. doi: 10.3390/agronomy14010007 McLaughlin MJ, McBeath TM, Smernik R, Stacey SP, Ajiboye B, Guppy C (2011) The chemical nature of P accumulation in agricultural soils-implications for fertiliser management and design: An Australian perspective. Plant Soil 349:69–87. doi: 10.1007/s11104-011-0907-7 Motasim AM, Samsuri AW, Shairah A, Sukor A, Adibah AM (2021) Gaseous Nitrogen Losses from Tropical Soils with Liquid or Granular Urea Fertilizer Application. Sustain 2021, Vol 13, Page 3128 13:3128. doi: 10.3390/su13063128 Motasim AM, Samsuri AW, Sukor ASA, Amin AM (2022) Effects of Liquid Urea Application Frequency on the Growth and Grain Yield of Corn (Zea mays L.). Commod Corn 1–12. doi: 10.1080/00103624.2022.2071435 Motasim AM, Samsuri AW, Sukor ASA, Amin AM (2022) Split application of liquid urea as a tool to nitrogen loss minimization and NUE improvement of corn – A review. Chil J Agric Res 82:645–657. doi: 10.4067/S0718-58392022000400645 Motasim MA, Samsuri AW, Sukor, ASA, Adibah AM (2021) Nitrogen Dynamics in Tropical Soils Treated with Liquid and Granular Urea Fertilizers. Agriculture 11:546 Mueller MS, Vyn TJ (2017) The Effects of Late season Nitrogen Applications in Corn. Indiana Soil Water- AY-364-W Purdue Extension Educ Store 10:1–5 Nash PR, Nelson KA, Motavalli PP (2013) Corn Yield Response to Timing of Strip-Tillage and Nitrogen Source Applications. Agron J 105:623–630. doi: 10.2134/agronj2012.0338 Nor N, Rabu MR, Adnan MA, Rosali MH (2019) An overview of the grain corn industry in Malaysia. FFTC Agric Policy Platf (FFTC-AP) Retrieved March 10:2020 De Oliveira SM, De Almeida REM, Ciampitti IA, Junior CP, Lago BC, Trivelin PCO, Favarin JL (2018) Understanding N timing in corn yield and fertilizer N recovery: An insight from an isotopic labeled-N determination. PLoS One 13:1–14. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192776 OSU (2016) Information on world maize production. In: Oklahoma State Univ. http://nue.okstate.edu/Crop_Information/World_Maize_Production.htm . Accessed 13 Aug 2019 Paramananthan S (2000) Soils of Malaysia: Their Characteristics and Identification, 1st ed. Academy of Sciences Malaysia, Kulalumpur, Malaysi Paustian K, Babcock BA, Hatfield J, Kling CL, Lal R, McCarl BA, Mclaughlin S, Mosier AR, Post WM, Rice CW (2004) Climate change and greenhouse gas mitigation: challenges and opportunities for agriculture Reay DS, Davidson EA, Smith KA, Smith P, Melillo JM, Dentener F, Crutzen PJ (2012) Global agriculture and nitrous oxide emissions. Nat Clim Chang 2:410–416. doi: 10.1038/nclimate1458 Ren B, Ma Z, Guo Y, Liu P, Zhao B, Zhang J (2023) Applying urea ammonium nitrate solution saves nitrogen resources by changing soil microbial composition under micro sprinkling fertigation: an effective nitrogen management practice. F Crop Res 302:109087. doi: 10.1016/J.FCR.2023.109087 Richards LA, Fireman M (1943) Pressure-plate apparatus for measuring moisture sorption and transmission by soils. Soil Sci 56:395–404 Rimski-Korsakov H, Rubio G, Lavado RS (2009) Effect of water stress in maize crop production and nitrogen fertilizer fate. J Plant Nutr 32:565–578 Rochette P, Angers DA, Chantigny MH, Gasser M, Macdonald JD, Pelster DE, Bertrand N (2013) NH3 volatilization, soil NH + 4 concentration and soil pH following subsurface banding of urea at increasing rates. Can J Soil Sci 93:261–268. doi: 10.4141/CJSS2012-095 Sainju UM, Ghimire R, Pradhan GP (2019) Nitrogen Fertilization II: Management Practices to Sustain Crop Production and Soil and Environmental Quality. In: Nitrogen Fixation. IntechOpen SAS Institute Inc. (2013) SAS ® 9.4 Statements Reference. 476 Shamshuddin J, Darus A (1979) Mineralogy and Genesis of Soils in Uuiversiti Pertanian Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor. pertanika 2:141–148 Sharifuddin HAH, Fauziah I, Zaharah AR (1990) Technique of Soil Testing and Plant Analysis Sharifuddin, H. A. H., I. Fauziah, and A. R. Zaharah. 1990. “Technique of Soil Testing and Plant Analysis and Their Utilization for Crop Production in Malaysia.” Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysi. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 21:1959–1978. doi: 10.1080/00103629009368350 Singh J, Mahal JS, Manes GS, Singh M (2013) Development and evaluation of nitrogen (liquid Urea) applicator for straw mulched no-till wheat residue simultaneously. Agric Eng Internatinal CIGR J 15:30–38 Steusloff TW, Nelson KA, Motavalli PP, Singh G (2019) Fertilizer placement affects corn and nitrogen use efficiency in a claypan soil. Agron J 111:2512–2522. doi: 10.2134/agronj2019.02.0108 Tan KH (2005) Determination of soil water. In: Soil sampling, preparation, and analysis, 2nd ed. CRC Press: Taylor and Francis Group Teh CBS, Talib J (2006) Soil and Plant Analyses Vol. I Soil Physics Analyses. Department of Land Management, Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Sedang, Malaysia USDA (United State Department of Agriculture) (2024) World Agricultural Production. Forign Agricultural Service. Circular Series. WAP 3–24, March 2024. Approved by the World agricutural Outlook Board. https://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/circulars/production.pdf Vaio N (2006) Ammonia Volatilization and N-uptake from Urea, Urea Ammonium Nitrate (UAN) and NITAMIN® (Uea polimar) Applied to Tall Fescue in Georgia. Master Thesis, The university of Georgia Walsh O, Pandey A, Christiaens R (2015) Applying Liquid Nitrogen In Spring Wheat. In: Western Nutrient Management Conference. Reno, Nevada, USA, p 8 Wang S, Luo S, Yue S, Shen Y, Li S (2016) Fate of 15N fertilizer under different nitrogen split applications to plastic mulched maize in semiarid farmland. Nutr Cycl Agroecosystems 105:129–140. doi: 10.1007/s10705-016-9780-3 Yao Y, Zhang M, Tian Y, Zhao M, Zhang B, Zhao M, Zeng K, Yin B (2018) Urea deep placement for minimizing NH3 loss in an intensive rice cropping system. F Crop Res 218:254–266 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 13 Jun, 2024 Reviews received at journal 12 Jun, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 11 Jun, 2024 Reviews received at journal 10 Jun, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 10 Jun, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 13 May, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 06 May, 2024 Submission checks completed at journal 06 May, 2024 First submitted to journal 15 Apr, 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 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-4267799","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":299225941,"identity":"96e56664-0f87-4036-9698-ca1fec5b4512","order_by":0,"name":"Ahmmed Md Motasim","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Soil Resource Development Institute","correspondingAuthor":true,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ahmmed","middleName":"Md","lastName":"Mota","suffix":"Md"},{"id":299225945,"identity":"3a56c433-bb16-4005-8b1d-f75482c62b82","order_by":1,"name":"Abd. Wahid Samsuri","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universiti Putra Malaysia","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Abd.","middleName":"Wahid","lastName":"Samsuri","suffix":""},{"id":299225949,"identity":"0046838d-3243-4320-87d3-caf6e6bd6f8e","order_by":2,"name":"Arina Shairah Abdul Sukor","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universiti Putra Malaysia","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Arina","middleName":"Shairah Abdul","lastName":"Sukor","suffix":""},{"id":299225952,"identity":"ab5a09db-65a4-42b1-81ea-6b492e9ea077","order_by":3,"name":"Akter Amaily","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Habiganj Agricultural University","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Akter","middleName":"","lastName":"Amaily","suffix":""},{"id":299225954,"identity":"d2aa23f5-85db-4ba2-aa0a-0bc0b36a810b","order_by":4,"name":"Mohd. Amin Adibah","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Universiti Putra Malaysia","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mohd.","middleName":"Amin","lastName":"Adibah","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-04-15 07:05:08","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4267799/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4267799/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":56222186,"identity":"0342d8fa-806a-4233-9cb3-5b85c8cb6a6e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-10 04:52:46","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":845684,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4267799/v1/d6bd2e01-1da7-4cd9-bd3c-d090aae06359.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"\u003cp\u003eEffects of Liquid Urea Rates on Nitrogen Dynamics, Growth, and Yield of Grain Corn (Zea Mays L.)\u003c/p\u003e","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eCorn (\u003cem\u003eZea mays\u003c/em\u003e L) is the largest cereal crop after wheat and rice, adopted to grow under diverse climatic conditions and soils all over the world. It is a multipurpose crop used for food, feed, and even raw materials for biofuel production [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e30\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e48\u003c/span\u003e]. Nitrogen management in sustainable corn production is not only essential but also a challenging job. Optimum N application significantly increases crop production, but the application of excess N fertilizers leads to low NUE and high N losses (e.g., leaching), which is a possible reason for economic and environmental imbalance, and it causes waste of resources and environmental degradation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e20\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eUrea is the most important N fertilizer, which plays a vital role in global crop production and food security. Usually, farmers are overusing N fertilizers, particularly synthetic nitrogenous fertilizers like urea, to achieve higher crop production [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e19\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e22\u003c/span\u003e]. Yet, there has been no consistent crop yield increment resulting from the increased N fertilizer application [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e51\u003c/span\u003e]. This excess N fertilizer causes lower NUE, lowers farm income, and causes water pollution, atmospheric disruption and soil health degradation [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e]. Thus, efficient management of N fertilizer is very important to sustain crop yields and maintain soil quality and reduce environmental threats [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e40\u003c/span\u003e]. The improvement of NUE depends on effective N management, which is the combination of using suitable N sources, appropriate application doses, correct placement, and the timing of fertilizer application [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e29\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eLiquid urea has the potential to be an alternate source of N for improving crop yield. Its application resulted in higher N mineralization, exchangeable NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e concentration, yield and NUE of corn while reduced N loss (e.g., N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO emission, NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e volatilization and Nitrate leaching) than GU application [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e]. Liquid urea can disperse throughout the soil profile and therefore improves the adsorption capacity of NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e by the soil particles, which will reduce the further conversion of NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e and retain more N for better availability to the crops [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e39\u003c/span\u003e]. Some researchers recommended LU be used during a warm period of the growing season to reduce gaseous losses. The application of LU recovered N deficiency quickly and gave a better performance for profitable cereal production than GU due to the lower risk of loss and its rapid availability to the crops [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e50\u003c/span\u003e] .\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eExcess use of N fertilizer and faulty application methods lead to lower NUE and higher N loss potential (e.g., nitrate leaching), resulting in huge environmental problems [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e21\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e35\u003c/span\u003e]. Liquid urea (e.g., UAN) application reduced total N loss more than GU and recorded about 70% higher uptake efficiency than ammonium nitrate. In addition, LU application significantly minimized the N leaching and GHGs gases (e.g., N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO) emission compared to GU [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e45\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e49\u003c/span\u003e]. Liquid N fertilizer application resulted in 19% higher NUE than GU in winter wheat and maintained equilibrium in the soil-crop nutrient mechanism for gradual N uptake by the plant [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e23\u003c/span\u003e]. No urea fertilizer management method can effectively increase the NUE and yield of grain corn. A significant part of applied N remained unexplained due to diversified losses and low uptake potential. It is crucial to increase the N availability of applied urea fertilizer, which can increase the N uptake by the plant. Liquid urea can distributes rapidly throughout the soil profile and reduce the possible loss potential, which increases the N availability to the plant. The experiment was conducted to investigate the application methods and rates of LU on the growth, development and yield of grain corn and to directly compare the efficiency of LU and GU application on the growth, development and yield of grain corn.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eSet up of the experiment\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe pot experiment was conducted in the New Glasshouse (03̊ 00́ 12.6̋ N; 101̊ 47́ 22.4̋ E), Ladang 15, Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia during November 2019 to March 2020. The location experienced an average yearly rainfall of about 2000 mm along with the temperature ranges between 19℃ and 36\u0026deg;C and relative humidity 80\u0026ndash;90%. The clay loam soil (Bungor soil series) was collected from Jalan Pertanian, UPM Campus, Puchong (03̊ 00̋ 12.6́ N; 101̊ 47̋ 22.4́ E) and the physicochemical properties of the soil were described in the Table \u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFertilizer treatments of the experiment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eValues\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMethod References\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSoil properties\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBungor soil series\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUSDA Taxonomic class\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003every fine, kaolinitic, isohypertermic, haplic hapludoxs, typic paleudult, Ultisols\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e33\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e42\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUSDA soil texture class\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSandy clay loam\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSand (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e69.28\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.021\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSilt (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.28\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eClay (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.44\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMoisture content at field capacity (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.74\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.051\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e37\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003epH\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.93\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Jones, 2001; Sharifuddin et al., 1990)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal C (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.41\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.041\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal N (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.07\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e- N (mg/kg)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.31\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u003c/sup\u003e- N (mg/kg)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.41\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.042\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCEC (cmol\u003csub\u003ec\u003c/sub\u003e/kg)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.78\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e16\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExchangeable K (cmol\u003csub\u003ec\u003c/sub\u003e/ kg)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.21\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\" morerows=\"4\" rowspan=\"5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e[\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e43\u003c/span\u003e]\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExchangeable Ca (cmol\u003csub\u003ec/\u003c/sub\u003e /kg)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.41\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.024\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExchangeable Mg (cmol\u003csub\u003ec\u003c/sub\u003e/kg)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.44\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.008\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExchangeable Al (cmol\u003csub\u003ec\u003c/sub\u003e /kg)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.37\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.031\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAvailable P (mg /kg)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\"\u0026plusmn;\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.03\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.012\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAbout 18 kg of clean, sieved soil was filled into polybags (18̋ x 20̋), and the moisture content was maintained at field capacity. Three corn seeds were sown in the polybag, and thinning was done after germination, keeping only one healthy and vigorous seedling per polybag arranged according to the Randomized Completely Block Design (RCBD). The treatments used in this study were as shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFertilizer treatments of the experiment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLabel\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFertilizer treatment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eU0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo urea (control)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGranular urea 100% in two equal splits at 10th and 28th DAS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLiquid urea 100% in two equal splits at 10th and 28th DAS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLiquid urea 50% in two equal splits at 10th and 28th DAS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLiquid urea 33% in two equal splits at 10th and 28th DAS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eFertilizer and agronomic management\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe recommended fertilizer rate of 140 kg/ha N, 100 kg/ha P\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO\u003csub\u003e5\u003c/sub\u003e and 120 kg/ha K\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO were applied [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e14\u003c/span\u003e]. The full amounts of urea, triple superphosphate (TSP), and muriate of potash (MoP) were 5.70g, 4.13g and 3.74 g per polybag, respectively. Triple superphosphate and MoP were incorporated into the soil 48 hours before seed sowing. The urea amount was applied to the plant according to the fertilizer treatment (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). The first dose of N was applied at 10 DAS. Water was added every morning to maintain field capacity moisture level. Weeding was done manually if weed was present.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eData collection and processing\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe soil and plant samples were analysed for total N using the dry combustion method on a TruMac, LECO Corporation, USA [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e18\u003c/span\u003e] CNS analyser, cation exchange capacity (CEC) was determined using the leaching method [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e], NH\u003csub\u003e4\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e+\u003c/sup\u003e-N and NO\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u0026minus;\u003c/sup\u003e-N concentrations were estimated by distillation method [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e15\u003c/span\u003e], soil particle distribution was determined using the pipette method [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e47\u003c/span\u003e], gravimetric water content was determined at field capacity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e46\u003c/span\u003e], and pH was determined in 2.5 (soil: water) ratio and measured using Metrohm827 pH meter (Metrohm AG, Switzerland). The properties of soil are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. The yield contributing parameters and yield data were collected. The N uptake by the biomass, grain and stover were analyzed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe total N content (kg/ha) in the plant was calculated [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e] by multiplying the grain and stover dry yield (kg/ha) with the N content (mg/kg).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Taba\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTotal N content (kg/ha)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e=\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eN content(mg/kg) X Yield{grain and stover(kg/ha)}\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e1000000\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"No\" id=\"Tabb\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eNUE (%)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003e=\u0026thinsp;100 X\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTotal N uptake \u0026ndash; Total N uptake by the control plant\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAmount of urea applied\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eStatistical Analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe recorded data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) for a factorial experimental design using Statistical Analysis Software (SAS) [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e41\u003c/span\u003e] and mean comparisons were analyzed using the least significance difference test (LSD) at 5% level of significance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003ePlant growth parameters and N content at 50 DAS\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe plant growth parameters of grain corn receiving LU and GU urea treatments at 50 DAS are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e. There was no significant difference in plant height among the fertilized plants, but they were significantly higher than the U0 (control) treatment. There was also no significant difference in stem diameter among all the treatments. The SPAD value of the control plant differed significantly from the fertilizer treated plant, where the highest SPAD value was recorded from the LU100 (54.35), it was not significantly different from GU100 (52.55) treatment. On the other hand, LU50 (47.93) was not significantly different from the GU100 (52.55) treatment, but LU33 was lower than GU100. The lowest SPAD value was recorded from U0 (39.73), but it was not significantly different from LU33 (44.10) treatment. There was a significant difference among treatments in the fresh biomass of corn at 50 DAS. The fresh biomass production was the highest in LU100 (394.50 g), which was 13.86% higher than GU100 (346.47 g) treatment. On the other hand, the fresh biomass production in GU100 and LU50 treatments was not significantly different. The lowest fresh biomass was recorded from U0 (181.49 g), followed by LU33 (321.41 g) treatment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrowth parameters of grain corn at 50 DAS (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePlant height\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(cm)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStem diameter (cm)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChlorophyll content (SPAD value)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFresh\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ebiomass (g)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eU0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e186.80\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.02 b*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.60\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39.73\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.59 d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e181.49\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.85 d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e206.99\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.65 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.79\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52.55\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.45 ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e346.47\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;9.47 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e216.92\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.61 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.84\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e54.35\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.46 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e394.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;9.04 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e214.61\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.29 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.79\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47.93\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.35 bc\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e355.45\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;8.46 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e212.38\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.48 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.76\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44.10\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.39 cd\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e321.41\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.71 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.7311\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.009\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCV (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.80\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.98\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e*Different letters within the column indicate significant differences between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results on the dry matter, %N content, total N content in plant and NUE of grain corn at 50 DAS have shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e. There was no significant difference in dry matter production among the fertilized plants, but all of them differed significantly from the control treatment. The dry matter production in the LU100 treatment was 55.53 g/plant, and the lowest (28.44 g/plant) dry matter was recorded from the U0 (control) treatment. The highest %N content was recorded in LU100 (1.73%) followed by the other treatment, but they were significantly different from the other fertilized treatments. The lowest %N content was recorded from the U0 (1.24%) treatment. Similarly, the highest total N content in the plant was recorded in LU100 (0.960 g), but it was significantly different from LU50 (0.864 g) treatment. In addition, total N content in GU100, LU50 and LU33 were as par as they were not significantly different. The NUE was the highest in the LU33 (25.05%) treatment, followed by LU50 (18.04%) treatment. The NUE values in GU100 and LU100 were not significantly different, the LU50 treatment recorded 107.59% higher NUE than GU100.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN content (%) and NUE of grain corn at 50 DAS (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDry matter (g/plant)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e% N content/plant\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal N content (g)/plant\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNUE (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eU0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.44\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.94 b*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.24\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.04 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.352\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e54.24\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.43 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.56\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.04 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.847\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.04 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.69\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.01 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e55.54\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.19 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.73\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.05 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.960\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.04 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.67\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.82 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e55.24\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.61 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.57\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.03 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.864\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.04 ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.04\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.61 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53.05\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.31 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.56\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.04 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.828\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.03 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.05\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.96 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.9627\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.1168\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0994\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.7257\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCV (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.56\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e*Different letters within the column indicate significant differences between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eGrowth parameters at maturity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results of plant growth parameters at the mature stage of the corn are shown in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e. There was no significant difference in GU100 (229.75 cm), LU100 (232.50 cm) and LU50 (226.25 cm) treatments in terms of plant height, but they were significantly higher than LU33 and U0 (control) treatment. The lowest plant height was recorded from the U0 treatment. On the other hand, the U0 (197.00 cm) treatment was not significantly different from LU33 (214.25 cm) treatment. The highest leaf number was recorded from the LU100 (10.50) and the LU50 (10.25) treatments, while the lowest leaf number was recorded from the U0 (7.25) and LU33 (7.50) treatments. There were not significantly different in stem diameter and ear height among the treatments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePlant height, No. of leaf, stem diameter and ear height of grain corn at the mature stage (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePlant height (cm)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo. of leaf/plant\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStem diameter (cm)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEar height (cm)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eU0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e197.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.35 b*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.48 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.63\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e85.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e229.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.36 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.25 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.78\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e88.13 \u0026plusmn; 4.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e232.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.91 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.29 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.87\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e88.63\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e226.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.67 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.25 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.86\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e86.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.67\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e214.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.47 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.28 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.64\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.09\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e85.88\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.824\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.9435\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCV (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.85\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e*Different letters within the column indicate significant differences between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eYield and yield contributing parameters at maturity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results of ear length, days of maturity and fresh cob weight are tabulated in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e. The ear lengths in GU100 (22.25 cm), LU100 (22.88 cm), and LU50 (21.75 cm) treatments were not significantly different, and they were significantly higher than in LU33 (18.25 cm) treatment. Furthermore, the LU33 treatment was higher than the U0 (control) treatment in terms of ear length. There was no significant difference among the fertilized plant in the duration of maturity, but LU100 and GU100 were significantly higher than the U0 (control) treatment. The fresh cob weight of GU100 (10866.60 kg/ha), LU100 (10946.60 kg/ha), and LU50 (10927.93 kg/ha) were not significantly different, but they were significantly higher than LU33 (7519.96 kg/ha) treatment. On the other hand, the fresh cob weight of the LU33 treatment was significantly higher than the U0 (5079.97 kg/ha) treatment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEar length, days of maturity and fresh cob weight of grain corn at the mature stage (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEar length (cm)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDays of maturity (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFresh cob weight (kg/ ha)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eU0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.72 c*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e84.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.50 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5079.97\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;121.96\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.27 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e88.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.63 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10866.60\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;185.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22.88\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.13 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e89.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;3.02 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10946.60\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;181.35\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.25 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e86.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.25 ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10927.93\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;290.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.25 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e86.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.50 ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7519.96\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;367.57\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.899\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.7024\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e739.97\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCV (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.41\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"4\"\u003e*Different letters within the column indicate significant differences between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results of fresh stover weight, dry stover weight, grain weight and husk weight of grain corn at the mature stage are listed in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e. The highest fresh stover weight/plant was recorded from LU100 (281.48 g) treatment which was 22.08% higher than GU100 (230.63 g) treatment. The fresh stover weight in LU50 (213.46 g) and LU33 (198.41 g) were not significantly different. The lowest fresh stover weight was recorded in the U0 (185.51 g) treatment which was as par with the LU33 (198.41 g) treatment as they were not significantly different. The dry stover weight/ha was also a similar trend to fresh stover production. The dry stover weight/ha was the highest in the LU100 (5663.40 kg) treatment which was 8.74% higher than GU100 (5208.10 kg) treatment. Dry stover weight in LU50 (4735.44 kg) and LU33 (4506.77 kg) were not significantly different, but they were significantly higher than in U0 (3824.10 kg) treatment. The highest grain weight/plant was recorded from LU100 (102.17 g), followed by GU100 (94.89 g) and LU50 (92.75 g) treatments. However, GU100 and LU50 were not significantly different. The grain weight/plant in LU100 was 7.67% higher than in GU 100 treatment. The lowest grain weight/plant was recorded in U0 (39.50 g), followed by LU33 (65.10 g) treatment. The highest husk weight/ ha was recorded in the LU100 (1346.66 kg), which was 22.83% higher than GU100 (1096.33 kg) treatment. Husk weight/ha in GU100 (1096.33 kg) and LU50 (1093.33 kg) treatments were not significantly different, while the lowest husk weight/ha were recorded in LU33 (720.00 kg) and U0 (613.06 kg) treatments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab7\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 7\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFresh stover weight, dry stover weight, grain weight and husk weight of grain corn at the mature stage (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFresh stover weight (g/plant)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDry stover weight (kg/ha)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrin weight (g/plant)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHusk weight (kg/ha)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eU0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e185.51\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.65 d*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3824.11\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;210.74 d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.94 d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e613.06\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;30.26 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e230.63\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.85 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5208.10\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;216.71 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e94.89\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.52 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1093.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;63.48 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e281.48\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;7.88 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5663.43\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;157.43 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e102.17\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.18 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1346.66\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;59.13 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e213.46\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.34 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4735.44\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;200.27 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e92.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.93 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1093.33\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;63.48 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e198.41\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4.39 cd\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4506.77\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;153.76 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e65.10\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.48 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e720.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;55.51 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.84\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e417.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.5138\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e168.12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCV (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e*Different letters within the column indicate significant difference between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results of kernel rows, number of seed/row, 100-grain weight, and grain yield are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e. The number of kernel rows was not significantly different among the treatments. The highest number of seeds/ row was recorded in LU100 (34.50) treatment which were not significantly different from GU100 (32.25) and LU50 (33.75). On the other hand, GU100, LU50 and LU 33 were not significantly different, but they were significantly higher than the U0 (control) treatment. The lowest number of seeds per row was recorded from the U0 (19.25) treatment. The 100-grain weight in the fertilized plant was significantly higher than the U0 (control) treatment. 100-grain weight in the LU100 (22.50 g), LU50 (21.39 g), and GU100 (20.51 g) treatments were not significantly different. On the other hand, the 100-seed weight of the treatment GU100 and LU33 were not significantly different. The lowest 100-grain weight resulted from U0 (14.75 g) treatment followed by LU33 (18.50 g) treatment. The grain yield was the highest in the LU100 (6249.03 kg/ha) treatment which was 8.70% and 10.22% higher than GU100 and LU50 treatments. Nonetheless, the grain yield in GU100 (5746.64 kg/ha) was not significantly different from the LU50 (5666.50 kg/ha) treatment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab8\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 8\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKernel rows, No. of seed/row, 100-seed and grain yield of grain corn at the mature stage (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKernel rows (No.)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo. of seed/ row\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e100-grain weight (g)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrain yield\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(kg/ha)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eU0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.44 c*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.95 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2906.65\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;228.87 d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.55 ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20.51\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.96 ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5746.64\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;102.99 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.00\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.85 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.96 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6249.03\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;41.60 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.50 ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.39\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.37 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5666.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;59.22 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.25\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28.75\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.95 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.50\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.96 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4271.98\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;78.69 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e367.75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCV (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.90\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.91\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e*Different letters within the column indicate significant difference between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05). NS\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Not significant.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eN content and NUE of grain corn at maturity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe %N in stover, grain, total N content in plant and NUE are stated in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e. The %N content in the stover in the LU100 (0.655%) and GU100 (0.659%) treatments were not significantly different, but they were significantly higher than LU50 (0.492%) treatment. The highest %N content in the grain was recorded from LU100 (1.489%) among the treatments, followed by LU50 (1.274%). The %N content by the grain in LU50 (1.274%) was even higher than in GU100 (1.159%) treatments. The %N content grain in LU100 and LU50 was 28.47% and 9.92% higher than GU100 treatment, respectively. The highest total N content in the plant was recorded in LU100 treatment (102.83 kg/ha), followed by GU100 (82.84 kg/ha) and LU50 (77.62 kg/ha) treatments. In addition, the total N content in the LU100 treatment was 24.15% higher than in the GU100 treatment. The total N content in GU100 and LU50 was not significantly different, but they were higher than LU33 (46.83 kg/ha) treatment. The lowest total N content was recorded in U0 (30.78 kg/ha) treatment, followed by LU33. The NUE was highest in LU50 treatment (66.92%), followed by LU100 (51.47%). The NUE in the LU50 treatment was 79.94% higher than the GU100 treatment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab9\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 9\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e%N in stover, grain, total N content in plant and NUE of grain corn at the mature stage (Mean\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;SE)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e% N in stover\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e% N in grain\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal N content in plant (kg/ha)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNUE (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eU0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.345\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.019 c*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.917\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.03 d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30.78\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.92 d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.659\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.010 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.159\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.04 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e82.84\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.87 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e37.19\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.93 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.655\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.004 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.489\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.04 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e102.83\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.93 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.47\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.82 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.492\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.0178 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.274\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.03 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e77.62\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.07 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66.92\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.47 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.358\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.005 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.966\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.02 d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46.83\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1.05 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34.40\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;2.94 c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.031\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.095\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.704\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.756\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCV (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.55\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e*Different letters within the column indicate significant difference between means using the least significant difference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003e.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003eTotal N (%) content of post-harvest soil\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe nitrogen content (%) of post-harvest soil is presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e. The N content in LU100 (0.073%), GU100 (0.073%) and LU50 (0.067%) treatment was not significantly different though they were significantly higher than in U0 (control) and LU33 treatments. The lowest N content of post-harvest soil was found in U0 (0.052%) and LU33 (0.055%) treatments.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab10\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 10\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal N content of post-harvest soil\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatment\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal N content (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eU0\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.052\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.003 b*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.074\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.002 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU100\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.073\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.002 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.067\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.003 a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLU33\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.055\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;0.003 b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLSD\u003csub\u003e0.05\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0075\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCV (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003ctfoot\u003e \u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"2\"\u003e*Different letters within the column indicate significant differences between means using the least significant deference test (LSD) at 5% significant level (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tfoot\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results of the study revealed that the yield contributing parameters and yield of grain corn was significantly different between the application of LU and GU. The SPAD value, fresh biomass and N content were highest in the LU100 treatment while harvested at 50 DAS among all the treatments. Besides, LU50 treatment was not significantly different from GU100, even when half of the recommended dose was used. Possibly, the LU treatments provided more available N for the plant for uptake and fewer N losses than GU, which promoted the corn plant to take up a greater amount of N than GU applications; meanwhile, GU had higher N loss, as it was reported about 10\u0026ndash;80% N loss from applied urea remain unexplained [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e]. The higher N uptake promoted higher growth and development, and the higher growth enabled higher biomass production. The higher growth also increased the yield contributing parameters and finally increased the yield of the crop. The LU-treated plant might have received more available N, which increased the N uptake by the corn plant and increased the N content in the plant. Biomass production is positively associated with growth and N uptake rate by the plant [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e31\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt the mature stage, the yield components such as ear length and fresh cob weight in LU50 were as par with GU100 as they were not significantly different even when only half of the recommended urea dose was applied. Due to the higher availability of N and lower N loss, the plant in LU50 treatment could take up a higher amount of N. The increased N content in the plant led to increased yield ultimately [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e]. Other researchers reported that less biomass production was recorded (260.86 g/plant and 266.59 g/plant ) when N was applied at a lower rate (70 kg/ha and 140 kg/ha) due to lower N availability and uptake (2.12 g N/plant and 2.58 g N/plant) against plant demand [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e38\u003c/span\u003e]. However, this was not observed for LU applied at 50% of the recommended dosage.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe LU100 treatment produced the highest grain yield as the growth and development of the corn plant was also higher. The balanced N concentration in plants promotes greater protein synthesis, which can be stored in the grain [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e]. In addition, grain yield in LU50 was not significantly different from the GU100 application which indicates that most of the N in GU100 was lost. There is a directly proportional relationship between N source and corn development [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e32\u003c/span\u003e]. Liquid urea was reported to increase plant N uptake potential, which significantly affected the grain yield of corn [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e]. Liquid urea application has also been reported to increase grain yield by 15\u0026ndash;20% due to higher N availability than GU [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e17\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e26\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e]. The higher plant N uptake by the LU-treated crops was due to the higher urea mineralization and adsorption of N by the soil particles, which increases N availability and reduces N losses (e.g., gaseous and leaching), where, the gaseous (NH\u003csub\u003e3\u003c/sub\u003e and N\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003eO) losses and leaching loss were significantly lower in LU-treated soil than that of GU at same application rate [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e24\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e27\u003c/span\u003e].\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNitrogen content in the plant is directly related to biomass production and N concentration in the plant. In this study, the highest total N content in the plant was recorded in the LU100 treatment. On the other hand, the N content in GU100 and LU50 was as par as they were not significantly different, as the LU treated plant received more available N for uptake and lower N losses than the GU treated plant. Singh et al. [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e] recorded a higher N uptake in LU applied crops compared to GU because of higher N availability. Moreover, Mueller and Vyn [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e28\u003c/span\u003e] obtained higher biomass production in the surface-banded UAN (a liquid N fertilizer) than in the surface application of urea, as urea had experienced greater gaseous loss.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNitrogen use efficiency will be higher if N is more available, while N losses are lower because of the higher N uptake potential of the crop. It is directly proportional to total biomass production and its N content. In LU50, NUE was the highest (66.92%) as a lower N rate (50% of recommendation) was used, but the yield (5666.50 kg/ha) was statistically similar to GU100 (5746.64 kg/ha. Granular urea application increased the N loss and reduced the N availability to the plant [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e36\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e44\u003c/span\u003e]. Liquid urea application improves NUE by decreasing N losses as LU can be dispersed throughout the rhizosphere and reduces the risk of N loss increasing the N availability and uptake potential of the crops [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e52\u003c/span\u003e]. Corn is a crop with high nutrient demand, and N is the most significant nutrient that influences crop productivity [\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e]; therefore, the soil cannot maintain optimum N in the soil applied with a lower N application rate or when applied in areas prone to N losses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe plant N content and N uptake by the plants depend on the demand and availability of N in the soil. The N demand in corn depends on its growing stages, and N availability depends on its soil adsorption and loss minimization processes. The fast mineralization of N reduces N losses and rapidly supplies N to plants, which will increase NUE and reduce the risk of environmental contamination. Optimum N management increases farm income by lowering fertilizer input cost, plant protection cost, and increasing grain quality.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe grain yield in GU100 and LU50 treatments were not significantly different, though; the grain yield was the highest in the LU100 treatment. The highest total N content (N uptake) was recorded in the LU100 treatment. The total N content in GU100 and LU50 were not significantly different. The NUE was highest in LU50 treatment, followed by LU100 treatment. So the LU100 treatment might be yield effective. In conclusion, the efficiency of LU was higher than GU in terms of the growth and development of grain corn. Further field assessment is necessary to conform to the findings\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003ch2\u003eConflict of interest:\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe author has no potential conflict of interest regarding publishing the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll authors contributed effectively to develop, procedure and writing\u0026mdash;reviewing and editing this manuscript. Ahmmed Md Motasim conducted the experiment, investigation, formal analysis, visualization,and writing the original draft of the manuscript. Editing and approval of final version of themanuscript by Abd. Wahid Samsuri, Arina Shairah Abdul Sukor, Amaily Akter and Adibah Mohd. Amin. All authors have read and agreed to the published the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis work is a part PhD research in Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), Malaysia. The authors thankful to the UPM, Malaysia and Bangladesh Agricultural Research Council (BARC), Bangladesh for their cordial and fruitful supports. The authors are also grateful to the Ministry of Agriculture, the People's Republic of Bangladesh, and the Soil Resource Development Institute (SRDI).\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis experiment is a part of the PhD work of the first author while doing research at Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia. Funding was gained during research but not any for article processing.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbbasi FF, Baloch MA, Wagan KH, Shah A. N, Rajpar I (2010) Growth and Yield of okra Under Foliar Application of Some New Multinutrient. Pakistan J 0f Agric Agric Eng Vet Sci 26:11\u0026ndash;18\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAbbasi MK, Tahir MM, Sadiq A, Iqbal M, Zafar M (2012) Yield and Nitrogen Use Efficiency of Rainfed Maize Response to Splitting and Nitrogen Rates in Kashmir, Pakistan. Agron J 104:448\u0026ndash;457. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.2134/agronj2011.0267\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2134/agronj2011.0267\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAdhikari P, Baral BR, Shrestha J (2016) Maize response to time of nitrogen application and planting seasons. J Maize Res Dev 2:83\u0026ndash;93. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003edx.doi.org/10.3126/jmrd.v2i1.16218\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3126/jmrd.v2i1.16218\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChapman HD (1965) Cation-exchange capacity. Wiley Online Library\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCulman S, Thomison P (2020) When Is It Too Late to Fertilize Corn with Nitrogen? In: Agron. Crop. Netw.. Ohio State Univ. Extension.OSU.EDU. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://agcrops.osu.edu/newsletter/corn-newsletter/2015-20/when-it-too-late-fertilize-corn-nitro\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://agcrops.osu.edu/newsletter/corn-newsletter/2015-20/when-it-too-late-fertilize-corn-nitro\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Accessed 4 Aug 2020\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEagle AJ, Bird JA, Horwath WR, Linquist BA, Brouder SM, Hill JE, Van Kessel C (2000) Rice yield and nitrogen utilization efficiency under alternative straw management practices. Agron J 92:1096\u0026ndash;1103. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.2134/agronj2000.9261096x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2134/agronj2000.9261096x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFranzluebbers AJ (2017) Ecology: Cycling of carbon and nitrogen. In: Lal R (ed) Encyclopedia of Soil Science, 3rd ed. CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, FL, USA, pp 711\u0026ndash;715\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHolloway RE, Bertrand I, Frischke AJ, Brace DM, Mclaughlin MJ (2001) Improving fertiliser efficiency on calcareous and alkaline soils with fluid sources of P, N and Zn. Plant Soil 209\u0026ndash;219\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHuma B, Hussain M, Ning C, Yuesuo Y (2019) Human Benefits from Maize Article Information. Sch J Appl Sci Res 2:1\u0026ndash;7\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJiang C, Lu D, Zu C, Shen J, Wang S, Guo Z, Zhou J, Wang H (2018) One-time root-zone N fertilization increases maize yield, NUE and reduces soil N losses in lime concretion black soil. Sci Rep 8:1\u0026ndash;10. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1038/s41598-018-28642-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41598-018-28642-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJones JB (2001) Laboratory guide for conducting soil tests and plant analysis. CRC press, Boca Raton, FL CRC Press United States US\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJunejo N, Khanif MY, Hanfi MM, Dharejo KA, Wan ZWY (2011) Reduced loss of NH3 by coating urea with biodegradable polymers, palm stearin and selected micronutrients. African J Biotechnol 10:10618\u0026ndash;10625. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.5897/AJB10.394\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5897/AJB10.394\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKanter DR, Zhang X, Mauzerall DL (2015) Reducing nitrogen pollution while decreasing farmers\u0026rsquo; costs and increasing fertilizer industry profits. J Environ Qual 44:325\u0026ndash;335\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKashiani P (2012) Genetic Potential of Selected Sweet Corn Inbred Lines and Analysis of Their Combining Ability Assisted by Microsatellite DNA Markers. PhD Thesis, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Malaysia\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKeeney DR (1983) Nitrogen\u0026mdash;availability indices. In: Page AL (ed) Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 2 Chemical and Microbiological Properties, 2nd ed. Wiley Online Library, pp 711\u0026ndash;733\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKeeney DR, Nelson. DW (1982) Nitrogen\u0026mdash;Inorganic Forms. Methods soil Anal Part 2 Chem Microbiol Prop 5:643\u0026ndash;698\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKubešov\u0026aacute; K, Balik J, Sedl\u0026aacute;ř O, Peklova L (2013) The effect of injection application of ammonium fertilizer on the yield of maize. Sci Agric Bohem 44:1\u0026ndash;5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLECO. (2018) LECO Corporation, USA. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://www.leco.com/about-us/corporate/approved-methods\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://www.leco.com/about-us/corporate/approved-methods\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Accessed 30 Nov 2018\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiang B, Zhao W, Yang X, Zhou J (2013) Fate of nitrogen-15 as influenced by soil and nutrient management history in a 19-year wheat\u0026ndash;maize experiment. F Crop Res 144:126\u0026ndash;134\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLiu Z, Sun K, Liu W, Gao T, Li G, Han H, Li Z, Ning T (2020) Responses of soil carbon, nitrogen, and wheat and maize productivity to 10 years of decreased nitrogen fertilizer under contrasting tillage systems. Soil Tillage Res 196:104444. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/j.still.2019.104444\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.still.2019.104444\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLv H, He P, Zhao S (2024) Optimized Nitrogen Fertilization Promoted Soil Organic Carbon Accumulation by Increasing Microbial Necromass Carbon in Potato Continuous Cropping Field. Agronomy 14:1\u0026ndash;12. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/agronomy14020307\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/agronomy14020307\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMa L, Li Y, Wei J, Li Z, Li H, Li Y, Zheng F, Liu Z, Tan D (2024) The Long-Term Application of Controlled-Release Nitrogen Fertilizer Maintains a More Stable Bacterial Community and Nitrogen Cycling Functions Than Common Urea in Fluvo-Aquic Soil. Agronomy 14. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/agronomy14010007\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/agronomy14010007\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMcLaughlin MJ, McBeath TM, Smernik R, Stacey SP, Ajiboye B, Guppy C (2011) The chemical nature of P accumulation in agricultural soils-implications for fertiliser management and design: An Australian perspective. Plant Soil 349:69\u0026ndash;87. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s11104-011-0907-7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11104-011-0907-7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMotasim AM, Samsuri AW, Shairah A, Sukor A, Adibah AM (2021) Gaseous Nitrogen Losses from Tropical Soils with Liquid or Granular Urea Fertilizer Application. Sustain 2021, Vol 13, Page 3128 13:3128. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.3390/su13063128\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/su13063128\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMotasim AM, Samsuri AW, Sukor ASA, Amin AM (2022) Effects of Liquid Urea Application Frequency on the Growth and Grain Yield of Corn (Zea mays L.). Commod Corn 1\u0026ndash;12. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1080/00103624.2022.2071435\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00103624.2022.2071435\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMotasim AM, Samsuri AW, Sukor ASA, Amin AM (2022) Split application of liquid urea as a tool to nitrogen loss minimization and NUE improvement of corn \u0026ndash; A review. Chil J Agric Res 82:645\u0026ndash;657. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.4067/S0718-58392022000400645\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4067/S0718-58392022000400645\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMotasim MA, Samsuri AW, Sukor, ASA, Adibah AM (2021) Nitrogen Dynamics in Tropical Soils Treated with Liquid and Granular Urea Fertilizers. Agriculture 11:546\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMueller MS, Vyn TJ (2017) The Effects of Late season Nitrogen Applications in Corn. Indiana Soil Water- AY-364-W Purdue Extension Educ Store 10:1\u0026ndash;5\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNash PR, Nelson KA, Motavalli PP (2013) Corn Yield Response to Timing of Strip-Tillage and Nitrogen Source Applications. Agron J 105:623\u0026ndash;630. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.2134/agronj2012.0338\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2134/agronj2012.0338\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNor N, Rabu MR, Adnan MA, Rosali MH (2019) An overview of the grain corn industry in Malaysia. FFTC Agric Policy Platf (FFTC-AP) Retrieved March 10:2020\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDe Oliveira SM, De Almeida REM, Ciampitti IA, Junior CP, Lago BC, Trivelin PCO, Favarin JL (2018) Understanding N timing in corn yield and fertilizer N recovery: An insight from an isotopic labeled-N determination. PLoS One 13:1\u0026ndash;14. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1371/journal.pone.0192776\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1371/journal.pone.0192776\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOSU (2016) Information on world maize production. In: Oklahoma State Univ. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttp://nue.okstate.edu/Crop_Information/World_Maize_Production.htm\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"http://nue.okstate.edu/Crop_Information/World_Maize_Production.htm\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e. Accessed 13 Aug 2019\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eParamananthan S (2000) Soils of Malaysia: Their Characteristics and Identification, 1st ed. Academy of Sciences Malaysia, Kulalumpur, Malaysi\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaustian K, Babcock BA, Hatfield J, Kling CL, Lal R, McCarl BA, Mclaughlin S, Mosier AR, Post WM, Rice CW (2004) Climate change and greenhouse gas mitigation: challenges and opportunities for agriculture\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eReay DS, Davidson EA, Smith KA, Smith P, Melillo JM, Dentener F, Crutzen PJ (2012) Global agriculture and nitrous oxide emissions. Nat Clim Chang 2:410\u0026ndash;416. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1038/nclimate1458\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/nclimate1458\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRen B, Ma Z, Guo Y, Liu P, Zhao B, Zhang J (2023) Applying urea ammonium nitrate solution saves nitrogen resources by changing soil microbial composition under micro sprinkling fertigation: an effective nitrogen management practice. F Crop Res 302:109087. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1016/J.FCR.2023.109087\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/J.FCR.2023.109087\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRichards LA, Fireman M (1943) Pressure-plate apparatus for measuring moisture sorption and transmission by soils. Soil Sci 56:395\u0026ndash;404\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRimski-Korsakov H, Rubio G, Lavado RS (2009) Effect of water stress in maize crop production and nitrogen fertilizer fate. J Plant Nutr 32:565\u0026ndash;578\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRochette P, Angers DA, Chantigny MH, Gasser M, Macdonald JD, Pelster DE, Bertrand N (2013) NH3 volatilization, soil NH\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;4 concentration and soil pH following subsurface banding of urea at increasing rates. Can J Soil Sci 93:261\u0026ndash;268. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.4141/CJSS2012-095\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4141/CJSS2012-095\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSainju UM, Ghimire R, Pradhan GP (2019) Nitrogen Fertilization II: Management Practices to Sustain Crop Production and Soil and Environmental Quality. In: Nitrogen Fixation. IntechOpen\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSAS Institute Inc. (2013) SAS \u0026reg; 9.4 Statements Reference. 476\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eShamshuddin J, Darus A (1979) Mineralogy and Genesis of Soils in Uuiversiti Pertanian Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor. pertanika 2:141\u0026ndash;148\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSharifuddin HAH, Fauziah I, Zaharah AR (1990) Technique of Soil Testing and Plant Analysis Sharifuddin, H. A. H., I. Fauziah, and A. R. Zaharah. 1990. \u0026ldquo;Technique of Soil Testing and Plant Analysis and Their Utilization for Crop Production in Malaysia.\u0026rdquo; Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysi. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 21:1959\u0026ndash;1978. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1080/00103629009368350\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00103629009368350\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSingh J, Mahal JS, Manes GS, Singh M (2013) Development and evaluation of nitrogen (liquid Urea) applicator for straw mulched no-till wheat residue simultaneously. Agric Eng Internatinal CIGR J 15:30\u0026ndash;38\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSteusloff TW, Nelson KA, Motavalli PP, Singh G (2019) Fertilizer placement affects corn and nitrogen use efficiency in a claypan soil. Agron J 111:2512\u0026ndash;2522. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.2134/agronj2019.02.0108\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2134/agronj2019.02.0108\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTan KH (2005) Determination of soil water. In: Soil sampling, preparation, and analysis, 2nd ed. CRC Press: Taylor and Francis Group\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTeh CBS, Talib J (2006) Soil and Plant Analyses Vol. I Soil Physics Analyses. Department of Land Management, Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Sedang, Malaysia\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eUSDA (United State Department of Agriculture) (2024) World Agricultural Production. Forign Agricultural Service. Circular Series. WAP 3\u0026ndash;24, March 2024. Approved by the World agricutural Outlook Board. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/circulars/production.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/circulars/production.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eVaio N (2006) Ammonia Volatilization and N-uptake from Urea, Urea Ammonium Nitrate (UAN) and NITAMIN\u0026reg; (Uea polimar) Applied to Tall Fescue in Georgia. Master Thesis, The university of Georgia\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWalsh O, Pandey A, Christiaens R (2015) Applying Liquid Nitrogen In Spring Wheat. In: Western Nutrient Management Conference. Reno, Nevada, USA, p 8\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWang S, Luo S, Yue S, Shen Y, Li S (2016) Fate of 15N fertilizer under different nitrogen split applications to plastic mulched maize in semiarid farmland. Nutr Cycl Agroecosystems 105:129\u0026ndash;140. doi: \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003e10.1007/s10705-016-9780-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10705-016-9780-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYao Y, Zhang M, Tian Y, Zhao M, Zhang B, Zhao M, Zeng K, Yin B (2018) Urea deep placement for minimizing NH3 loss in an intensive rice cropping system. F Crop Res 218:254\u0026ndash;266\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\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":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-agriculture","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Agriculture](https://www.springer.com/journal/44279)","snPcode":"44279","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44279/3","title":"Discover Agriculture","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Liquid urea, granular urea, NUE, grain corn","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4267799/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4267799/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eArbitrary use of urea fertilizer reduces nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) and increases the risk of environmental pollution. An experiment was conducted at the Universiti Putra Malaysia from November 2019 to March 2020 to evaluate the application methods and rates of liquid urea(LU) on the yield performance of corn. The treatments were, U0\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;control, GU100\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;Granular urea(GU) 100%, LU100\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;LU 100%, LU50\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;LU 50% and LU33\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;LU 33%, in two equal splits at 10th and 28th days after sowing (DAS) in randomized completely block design, replicates four. Results showed that plant height (206.99cm, 216.92cm, 214.61cm), ear height (88.13cm, 88.63cm, 86.00cm), days of maturity (88.75, 89.00, 86.75), number of seeds per kernel row (32.25, 34.50, 33.75), fresh cob weight (10886.60kg/ha, 10946.60kg/ha, 10927.93kg/ha) and 100-grain weight (20.51g, 22.50 g, 21.39 g) of corn were not different significantly(p\u0026thinsp;\u0026le;\u0026thinsp;0.05) in GU100, LU100 and LU50 treatments, respectively. The highest yield of corn was found with LU100 (6249.03kg/ha) treatment whereas the yield in LU50 (5666.50kg/ha) and GU100 (5746.64kg/ha) were not different significantly. Nitrogen(%) in plants was the highest in LU100 followed by LU50 treatment which was significantly higher than GU100 treatment. The total N content was also the highest in LU100 (102.83kg/ha) though the total N content was not different significantly in LU50 (77.62kg/ha) and GU100 (83.84kg/ha) treatments. The NUE was the highest in LU50 (66.92%) treatment followed by LU100 (51.47%) treatment. The results of the study suggested that the LU100 was the best application rate while LU50 treatment was comparable to GU100 in corn cultivation.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Effects of Liquid Urea Rates on Nitrogen Dynamics, Growth, and Yield of Grain Corn (Zea Mays L.)","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-05-10 04:44:38","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4267799/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2024-06-13T09:13:27+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-06-12T15:52:41+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"252924189580484558163841688288753875340","date":"2024-06-11T10:59:54+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-06-10T20:34:56+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"324915076617168071472165075339009529318","date":"2024-06-10T14:31:36+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-05-13T18:35:43+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-05-06T11:51:54+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2024-05-06T11:49:19+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Agriculture","date":"2024-04-15T07:03:48+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-agriculture","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Agriculture](https://www.springer.com/journal/44279)","snPcode":"44279","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44279/3","title":"Discover Agriculture","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"62b72be8-119d-491e-aa81-955346c908b8","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 10th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-08-14T12:07:33+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-05-10 04:44:38","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4267799","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4267799","identity":"rs-4267799","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"CiT4i_kKBbxQbnFL0ufpk","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}