IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v14y2024i4p552-d1367744.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Quality of Winter Wheat Grain by Different Sowing Strategies and Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates: A Case Study in Northeastern Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Krzysztof Lachutta

    (Department of Agrotechnology and Agribusiness, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Oczapowskiego 8, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland)

  • Krzysztof Józef Jankowski

    (Department of Agrotechnology and Agribusiness, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Oczapowskiego 8, 10-719 Olsztyn, Poland)

Abstract

The present study was undertaken to determine the effect of different sowing strategies and spring nitrogen (N) fertilizer rates on the technological quality of winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) grain in terms of its milling quality, protein complex quality, and enzyme activity (falling number). Winter wheat grain for laboratory analyses was produced in a small-area field experiment conducted between 2018 and 2021 in the AES in Bałcyny (53°35′46.4″ N, 19°51′19.5″ E, NE Poland). The experimental variables were (i) sowing date (early: 6 September 2018, 5 September 2019, and 3 September 2020; delayed by 14 days: 17–20 September; and delayed by 28 days: 1–4 October), (ii) sowing density (200, 300, and 400 live grains m −2 ), and (iii) split application of N fertilizer in spring (40 + 100, 70 + 70, and 100 + 40 kg ha −1 ) at BBCH stages 22–25 and 30–31, respectively. A sowing delay of 14 and 28 days increased the bulk density (by 1 and 1.5 percent points (%p), respectively), vitreousness (by 3 and 6%p, respectively), and total protein content of grain (by 1% an 2%, respectively). A sowing delay of 14 days increased grain hardness (by 5%), the flour extraction rate (by 1.4%p), and the falling number (by 3%) while also decreasing grain uniformity (by 1.9%p). In turn, a sowing delay of 28 days increased the wet gluten content of grain (+0.5–0.6%p) and improved the quality of the protein complex in the Zeleny sedimentation test (+1.5%). An increase in sowing density from 200 to 300 live grains m −2 led to a decrease in grain uniformity (by 2.6%p), the total protein content (by 1.5%), and the wet gluten content of grain (by 0.7%p). A further increase in sowing density decreased grain vitreousness (by 1.4%p). The grain of winter wheat fertilized with 40 and 100 kg N ha −1 in BBCH stages 22–25 and 30–31, respectively, was characterized by the highest hardness (64.7), vitreousness (93%), flour extraction rate (73.9%), total protein content (134 g kg −1 DM), wet gluten content (36%), and Zeleny sedimentation index (69 mL).

Suggested Citation

  • Krzysztof Lachutta & Krzysztof Józef Jankowski, 2024. "The Quality of Winter Wheat Grain by Different Sowing Strategies and Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates: A Case Study in Northeastern Poland," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-28, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:14:y:2024:i:4:p:552-:d:1367744
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/4/552/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/14/4/552/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. H. Han & W. Yang, 2009. "Influence of uniconazole and plant density on nitrogen content and grain quality in winter wheat in South China," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 55(4), pages 159-166.
    2. O. Kozlovský & J. Balík & J. Černý & M. Kulhánek & M. Kos & M. Prášilová, 2009. "Influence of nitrogen fertilizer injection (CULTAN) on yield, yield components formation and quality of winter wheat grain," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 55(12), pages 536-543.
    3. Marie HRUŠKOVÁ & Ivan ŠVEC, 2009. "Wheat hardness in relation to other quality factors," Czech Journal of Food Sciences, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 27(4), pages 240-248.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. M. Neuberg & D. Pavlíková & M. Pavlík & J. Balík, 2010. "The effect of different nitrogen nutrition on proline and asparagine content in plant," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 56(7), pages 305-311.
    2. Q.Q. Li & X.B. Zhou & Y.H. Chen & S.L. Yu, 2010. "Grain yield and quality of winter wheat in different planting patterns under deficit irrigation regimes," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 56(10), pages 482-487.
    3. Krisztina Balla & Mariann Rakszegi & Zhongy Li & Ferenc Békés & Szilvia Bencze & Ottó Veisz, 2011. "Quality of winter wheat in relation to heat and drought shock after anthesis," Czech Journal of Food Sciences, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 29(2), pages 117-128.
    4. O. Kozlovský & J. Balík & J. Černý & M. Kulhánek & J. Hakl & A. Kohoutek, 2010. "Assessment of surface and injection fertilization on various grass hybrids in grass-clover mixture," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 56(12), pages 557-563.
    5. Veronika Kselíková & Tomáš Vyhnánek & Pavel Hanáček & Petr Martinek, 2020. "Grain hardness in triticale: a physical and molecular evaluation," Czech Journal of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 56(3), pages 102-110.
    6. L. Peklová & J. Balík & O. Kozlovský & O. Sedlář & K. Kubešová, 2012. "Influence of injection nitrogen fertilization on yield and seed composition of winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.)," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 58(11), pages 508-513.
    7. M. Pavlík & D. Pavlíková & S. Vašíčková, 2010. "Infrared spectroscopy-based metabolomic analysis of maize growing under different nitrogen nutrition," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 56(11), pages 533-540.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:14:y:2024:i:4:p:552-:d:1367744. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.