Comparison of two versions of the acetylene inhibition/soil core method for measuring denitrification loss from an irrigated wheat field

 Two versions of the acetylene inhibition (AI)/soil core method were compared for the measurement of denitrification loss from an irrigated wheat field receiving urea-N at a rate of 100 kg ha^–1. With AI/soil core method A, the denitrification rate was measured by analysing the headspace N₂O, followed by estimation of N₂O dissolved in the solution phase using Bunsen absorption coefficients. With AI/soil core method B, N₂O entrapped in the soil was measured in addition to that released from soil cores into the headspace of incubation vessels. In addition, the two methods were also compared for measurement of the soil respiration rate. Of the total N₂O produced, 6–77% (average 40%) remained entrapped in the soil, whereas for CO₂, the corresponding figures ranged from 12–65% (average 44%). The amount of the entrapped N₂O was significantly correlated with the water-filled pore space (WFPS) and with the N₂O concentration in the headspace, whereas CO₂ entrapment was dependent on the headspace CO₂ concentration but not on the WFPS. Due to the entrapment of N₂O and CO₂ in soil, the denitrification rate on several (18 of the 41) sampling dates, and soil respiration rate on almost all (27 of the 30) sampling dates were significantly higher with method B compared to method A. Averaged across sampling dates, the denitrification rate measured with method B (0.30 kg N ha^–1 day^–1) was twice the rate measured with method A, whereas the soil respiration rate measured with method B (34.9 kg C ha^–1 day^–1) was 1.6 times the rate measured with method A. Results of this study suggest that the N₂O and CO₂ entrapped in soil should also be measured to ensure the recovery of the gaseous products of denitrification by the soil core method. Received: 12 May 1998