{"id":16,"date":"2018-09-14T03:00:29","date_gmt":"2018-09-14T03:00:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/agrispex.co.za.dedi30.cpt1.host-h.net\/?p=16"},"modified":"2018-09-14T04:21:31","modified_gmt":"2018-09-14T04:21:31","slug":"","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/nnn\/","title":{"rendered":"","raw":""},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false,"raw":""},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Dr Erik Adriaanse Afrikaans Version: Verskille in vervlugtiging tussen Stikstofbronne Volatilization of applied nitrogen (N) is primarily in the form of ammonia (NH3), although losses in the form of atmospheric N (N2 and N2O) may also occur when soils are waterlogged. Ammonia is released from ammonium (NH4+) containing and forming fertilisers when there is insufficient soil water present in which the ammonia can dissolve. This will also occur when fertilisers are applied and left remaining on or close to the soil surface. Atmospheric nitrogen is formed from nitrate nitrogen (NO3-) when the topsoil is waterlogged and deprived of oxygen for long periods. Water scarcity rather than long periods of water logging are far more common in South Africa. This article therefore focusses on ammonia losses from applied fertilisers combined with factors affecting this process such as soil pH and temperature. The efficacies of urease inhibitors which delay the conversion of urea to ammonia together with other possible solutions for the problem of ammonia volatilization are also discussed. Soil pH significantly affects Ammonia volatilization losses. Ammonia losses from urea were increased by 18% over five soils when the pH was increased from 6.5 to 9.1 (Figure 1). Most losses occurred from urea, followed by DAP, Ammonium sulphate, MAP and LAN (Figure 1). The difference in ammonia volatilization between urea and LAN was 15% at a pH of 9.1 (Figure 1). The conversion of urea to ammonium and also DAP to ammonium are alkaline reactions. This explains why these products will lose more N in the form of ammonia than other products, forming or releasing similar quantities of ammonium with no increase in pH. High application rates of urea or DAP which would result in high concentrations on the soil surface will increase soil pH more and consequently more ammonia will be formed and lost. Figure 1. Effect of soil pH, averaged over five soils, on ammonia volatilization of different N-sources applied on the surface at a rate of 120 kg N\/ha under controlled conditions. (Redrawn from Du Preez & Burger 1986) Nitrogen loss in the form of ammonia could be much higher than indicated in Figure 1. Du Preez & Burger (1986) showed ammonia losses of 55% which resulted from urea applications at a rate of 240 kg N\/ha, on a soil containing 50% clay and which had an original pH (H2O) of 7.5. Botha & Pretorius (1988) showed ammonia losses of as much as 61% following urea applications at a rate of 83 kg N\/ha on a soil with a clay content of 9.5% and a pH (H2O) of 7.9 after urea applications. Fenn & Miyamoto (1981) showed ammonia losses of 66% following urea surface applications on a soil with a pH (H2O) of 7.8. Ammonia losses are significantly affected by temperature. As temperatures increased from spring to mid-summer ammonia losses increased tremendously when using urea but also significantly with UAN (Figure 2). Ammonia losses from LAN however remained very low with increasing temperatures (Figure 2). Hoeft, et.al. (2000) stated...","protected":false,"raw":""},"author":15,"featured_media":1347,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_en_post_content":"[caption id=\"attachment_1270\" align=\"alignright\" width=\"150\"]\"\"<\/a> Dr Erik Adriaanse[\/caption]\r\n\r\nAfrikaans Version: Verskille in vervlugtiging tussen Stikstofbronne<\/a><\/strong>\r\n\r\nVolatilization of applied nitrogen (N) is primarily in the form of ammonia (NH3<\/sub>), although losses in the form of atmospheric N (N2<\/sub> and N2<\/sub>O) may also occur when soils are waterlogged. Ammonia is released from ammonium (NH4<\/sub>+<\/sup>) containing and forming fertilisers when there is insufficient soil water present in which the ammonia can dissolve. This will also occur when fertilisers are applied and left remaining on or close to the soil surface. Atmospheric nitrogen is formed from nitrate nitrogen (NO3<\/sub>-<\/sup>) when the topsoil is waterlogged and deprived of oxygen for long periods. Water scarcity rather than long periods of water logging are far more common in South Africa. This article therefore focusses on ammonia losses from applied fertilisers combined with factors affecting this process such as soil pH and temperature. The efficacies of urease inhibitors which delay the conversion of urea to ammonia together with other possible solutions for the problem of ammonia volatilization are also discussed.\r\n\r\nSoil pH significantly affects Ammonia volatilization losses. Ammonia losses from urea were increased by 18% over five soils when the pH was increased from 6.5 to 9.1 (Figure 1). Most losses occurred from urea, followed by DAP, Ammonium sulphate, MAP and LAN (Figure 1). The difference in ammonia volatilization between urea and LAN was 15% at a pH of 9.1 (Figure 1).\r\n\r\nThe conversion of urea to ammonium and also DAP to ammonium are alkaline reactions. This explains why these products will lose more N in the form of ammonia than other products, forming or releasing similar quantities of ammonium with no increase in pH. High application rates of urea or DAP which would result in high concentrations on the soil surface will increase soil pH more and consequently more ammonia will be formed and lost.\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_1345\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"685\"]\"\"<\/a> Figure 1. Effect of soil pH, averaged over five soils, on ammonia volatilization of different N-sources applied on the surface at a rate of 120 kg N\/ha under controlled conditions. (Redrawn from Du Preez & Burger 1986)[\/caption]\r\n\r\nNitrogen loss in the form of ammonia could be much higher than indicated in Figure 1. Du Preez & Burger (1986) showed ammonia losses of 55% which resulted from urea applications at a rate of 240 kg N\/ha, on a soil containing 50% clay and which had an original pH (H2<\/sub>O) of 7.5. Botha & Pretorius (1988) showed ammonia losses of as much as 61% following urea applications at a rate of 83 kg N\/ha on a soil with a clay content of 9.5% and a pH (H2<\/sub>O) of 7.9 after urea applications. Fenn & Miyamoto (1981) showed ammonia losses of 66% following urea surface applications on a soil with a pH (H2<\/sub>O) of 7.8.\r\n\r\nAmmonia losses are significantly affected by temperature. As temperatures increased from spring to mid-summer ammonia losses increased tremendously when using urea but also significantly with UAN (Figure 2). Ammonia losses from LAN however remained very low with increasing temperatures (Figure 2). Hoeft, et.al. (2000) stated that the potential for urease inhibitors to be effective would be best above 10\u00b0 C.\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_1347\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"685\"]\"\"<\/a> Figure 2. Effect of seasonal change in temperature on ammonia volatilization from different N-sources applied on the soil surface in Argentina under field conditions. (Fantanetto, 1995).[\/caption]\r\n\r\nUrease inhibitors such as Agrotain, SKW Piesteritz and Hanfeng Evergreen delay the conversion of urea to ammonia and therefore also the release of ammonia. The use of Agrotain resulted in average reductions of ammonia volatilization losses of 70% (25 to 100%) for urea and 44% (15 to 71%) for UAN (Chambers & Dampney, 2009). Volatilization from ammonium nitrate is however lower than volatilization from urea + Agrotain, which partly explains the higher yields obtained from using ammonium nitrate (Chambers & Dampney, 2009). Schwab & Murdock (2010) showed that when Agrotain was added to urea, maize yield was increased significantly (from 9.4 ton\/ha to 10.7 ton\/ha), but the ammonium nitrate treatment out-yielded both these treatments (11.6 ton\/ha). Urease inhibitors delay the formation of ammonium and therefore also reduce ammonia volatilization but in the process, also delay the formation of nitrate. Since only ammonium and nitrate are effectively utilized by crops the release of N in available forms is also delayed by urease inhibitors. When urea is to be applied together with urease inhibitors timely applications is therefore imperative. Since urea is 100% leachable (Adriaanse, 2012) and as such not utilisable by crops, the use of urease inhibitors will enhance the leaching of urea. Urease inhibitors were developed with the objective to reduce ammonia volatilization from the soil surface but serves no purpose when soil incorporated or washed into the soil together with urea (Hoeft et.al., 2000).\r\n\r\nConclusions and Recommendations.<\/strong>\r\n
    \r\n \t
  1. Nitrogen sources which are prone to volatilization should as far as possible be soil incorporated to bring them in contact with soil water.<\/li>\r\n \t
  2. Urea containing fertilizers could also be washed into the soil under irrigation or surface applied just before the rains under dry-land conditions.<\/li>\r\n \t
  3. Surface applications of ammonium containing or forming N sources, immediately following lime applications will result in ammonia volatilization and should therefore be avoided.<\/li>\r\n \t
  4. Urea and DAP surface applications during the warmest times of day and seasons will result in higher ammonia volatilization losses and should therefore be avoided. Surface applications of urea plus urease inhibitors could however be considered at high temperatures. Ammonia losses from surface applications of LAN at high temperatures is expected to be very low and therefore this remains the best option.<\/li>\r\n \t
  5. Multiple urea applications at relatively low rates will result in less volatilization than single urea applications at relatively higher rates.<\/li>\r\n \t
  6. Rather use LAN than urea when surface applications are unavoidable and cannot be soil incorporated or washed in. Urea that is treated with urease inhibitors can also be considered but bear in mind that volatilization from LAN will still be much lower. The use of LAN will also result in quicker responses to N deficiencies and most likely also higher yields than urea or urea combined with urease inhibitors.<\/li>\r\n \t
  7. The cost of aerial applications will probably be much higher for LAN compared to urea plus urease inhibitors not justifying the higher expected yield for LAN. Under such conditions timely aerial applications of urea plus urease inhibitors is recommended to allow for the expected delayed response.<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\nNB. Consult a qualified agronomist for locality specific applications. The results referred to in this article were obtained under specific conditions and are therefore not generally applicable under all conditions.<\/strong>\r\n\r\nReferences<\/strong>\r\nADRIAANSE, F. G., 2012. Logingsverskille by stikstofbronne. S.A.Graan\/Grain, 11\/12.\r\nBOTHA, A.D.P. & PRETORIUS, D.C. 1988. Ammonia volatilization and denitrification losses from commercial fertilizers applied to soil samples. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil, 1988, 5(2), 89-91.\r\nCHAMBERS, B. & DAMPNEY, P, 2009. Nitrogen efficiency and ammonia emissions from urea-based and ammonium nitrate fertilisers. International Fertiliser Society Conference, Cambridge, 10th December 2009. IFA, ISBN 978-0-85310-294-6 (ISSN 1466-1314)\r\nDU PREEZ C C, DU T BURGER, R. 1986. A proposed mechanism for the volatilization of ammonia from fertilized neutral to alkaline soils. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil, 1986, 3(1), 31-34.\r\n\r\nFANTANETTO H. 1995., Ciencia del Suelo, INTA, Argentina.\r\nFENN L. B. & MIYAMOTO S., 1981. Ammonia loss and associated reactions of urea in calcareous soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am J. 45:537-540.\r\nHOEFT. R.G., NAFZIGER. E.D., JOHNSON. R.R.& ALDRICH. S.R., 2000. Modern Corn and Soybeen Production pp 139. MCSP Publications, 1520, Yorkshire Dr, Champaign, IL, USA.\r\nSCHWAB, G.J. AND MURDOCK, L.W. 2010. Enhanced-Efficiency Nitrogen Fertilizer for Corn and Wheat Production. IFA International Conference on Enhanced-Efficiency Fertilizers, Miami, International Fertilizer Industry Association, Paris, France.","_en_post_name":"nnn","_en_post_excerpt":"","_en_post_title":"Volatilization differences between N sources","_af_post_content":"[caption id=\"attachment_1270\" align=\"alignright\" width=\"150\"]\"\"<\/a> Dr Erik Adriaanse[\/caption]\r\n\r\nENGLISH:\u00a0Volatilization differences between N sources<\/a>\r\n\r\nVervlugtiging van toegediende stikstof geskied hoofsaaklik in die vorm van ammoniak (NH3<\/sub>), hoewel verliese in die vorm van atmosferiese stikstof (N2<\/sub> en N2<\/sub>,O) ook moontlik is. Ammoniak ontstaan uit ammonium (NH4<\/sub>+<\/sup>) bevattende en vormende kunsmis wanneer daar nie genoeg grondwater is waarin die ammonium kan oplos nie, soos wanneer die kunsmis op of naby die oppervlakte toegedien en gelaat word. Atmosferiese stikstof word van nitraat stikstof (NO3<\/sub>-<\/sup>) gevorm wanneer die bogrond vir lang periodes met water versadig is en daar dus \u0149 volgehoue gebrek aan suurstof in die grond bestaan. Onder Suid-Afrikaanse toestande is \u0149 gebrek aan voldoende water meer tipies \u0149 probleem as lang periodes van versuiping. Die artikel fokus op ammoniak verliese uit toegediende kunsmis saam met faktore wat dit be\u00efnvloed soos grond pH en temperatuur. Die effektiwiteit van urease inhibeerders wat die omsetting van ureum na ammoniak vertraag en sodoende ammoniakverliese beperk word saam met ander moontlike oplossings vir die probleem bespreek.\r\n\r\nAmmoniakverliese word baie sterk deur grond pH be\u00efnvloed (Figuur 1). Grond pH verhogings van 6.5 na 9.1 het ammoniak verliese by ureum met 18% oor vyf gronde verhoog. Ureum het die meeste vervlugtig gevolg deur DAP, Ammoniumsulfaat, MAP en KAN. Die verskil in vervlugtiging tussen ureum en KAN was 15% by \u0149 pH van 9.1.\r\n\r\nDie omsetting van ureum na ammonium gaan ook gepaard met \u0149 pH verhoging in die grond wat verklaar waarom ureum meer vervlugtig as ander stikstofbronne wat dieselfde hoeveelheid ammonium-N vrystel. Soortgelyk sal DAP die pH van grondoplossings verhoog. Die implikasie hiervan is dat ho\u00ebr peile van toediening, wat meer kunsmiskorrels per eenheidsoppervlakte tot gevolg het, die grond pH meer sal verhoog en dus die % ammoniak verlies ook sal verhoog.\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_1349\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"685\"]\"\"<\/a> Figuur 1. Effek van grond pH op ammoniak vervlugtiging van verskillende stikstofdraers oor vyf gronde wat teen 120 kg N\/ha op die oppervlakte onder gekontroleerde toestande toegedien is. (Oorgeteken van Du Preez & Burger 1986)[\/caption]\r\n\r\nDie hoeveelheid ammoniak wat moontlik kan vervlugtig kan veel meer wees as wat in Figuur 1 aangedui word. Du Preez & Burger (1986) het ammoniak verliese van tot 55% by ureum toedienings van 240 kg N\/ha, op \u0149 grond met \u0149 klei-inhoud van 50% en \u0149 oorspronklike pH (H2<\/sub>O) van 7.5 aangetoon. Botha & Pretorius (1988) het ammoniak verliese van tot 61% by ureum toedienings van 83 kg N\/ha op \u0149 grond met \u0149 klei-inhoud van 9.5% en \u0149 pH (H2<\/sub>O) van 7.9 (na ureum toedienings) aangetoon. Fenn & Miyamoto (1981) het ammoniak verliese van 66% na oppervlak toedienings van ureum op \u0149 grond met \u0149 pH van 7.8 (H2<\/sub>O) aangetoon.\r\n\r\nTemperature wat toeneem van die lente tot midsomer het \u0149 drastiese toename in ammoniak verliese uit ureum en UAN tot gevolg, maar het byna geen effek op ammoniak verliese uit KAN nie (Figuur 2). Hoeft et.al. (2000) het aangedui dat die gebruik van urease inhibeerders die grootste potensiaal het om effektief te wees bo 10\u00b0 C.\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_1350\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"685\"]\"\"<\/a> Figuur 2. Effek van stygende temperature binne \u0149 seisoen op ammoniak vervlugtiging van verskillende stikstofbronne wat op die grondoppervlakte in Argentinia onder veldtoestande toegedien is. (Fantanetto, 1995).[\/caption]\r\n\r\nUrease inhibeerder soos Agrotain, SKW Piesteritz en Hanfeng Evergreen vertraag die omsetting van ureum na ammoniak en dus ook die vrystelling van ammoniak. Gemiddelde verminderings in ammoniak vrystellings van 70% (25 tot 100%) vir ureum en 44% (15 tot 71%) vir UAN is al vir Agrotain gerapporteer (Chambers & Dampney, 2009). Die vervlugtiging van ammoniumnitraat bly egter steeds minder as die vervlugtiging van ureum + Agrotain wat een van die redes is waarom die opbrengs wat met ammoniumnitraat verkry word gewoonlik ho\u00ebr is (Chambers & Dampney, 2009). Schwab & Murdock ( 2010) het ter ondersteuning vasgestel dat Agrotain wat saam met ureum toegedien word mielieopbrengs betekenisvol verhoog (van 9.4 ton\/ha na 10.7 ton\/ha), maar dat die opbrengs wat met ammoniumnitraat verkry is (11.6 ton\/ha) betekenisvol ho\u00ebr as enige van die twee behandelings was. Hoewel urease inhibeerders vervlugtiging van ureum verminder, vertraag dit ook die tempo van vrystelling van plantopneembare ammonium- en nitraat-stikstof. Tydige toedienings voordat ernstige N tekorte in die grond ontstaan is dus krities noodsaaklik. Terselfdertyd sal urease inhibeerders ook die loging van ureum bevorder omdat ureum nie opneembaar is nie en 100% loogbaar is (Adriaanse, 2012). Urease inhibeerders dien dus nie werklik \u0149 doel wanneer dit saam met ureum in die grond geplaas, ingewerk of ingewas word nie (Hoeft et.al., 2000).\r\n\r\nGevolgtrekkings en aanbevelings<\/strong>\r\n
      \r\n \t
    1. Stikstofbronne behoort sover moontlik diep genoeg in die grond geplaas of ingewerk te word sodat dit met grondwater in kontak sal bly.<\/li>\r\n \t
    2. Ureumbevattende kunsmis kan ook onder besproeiing in die grond ingewas word of onder dro\u00ebland toestande, net voor die re\u00ebn uitgestrooi word. DAP, MAP, ammoniumsulfaat en KAN, kan egter nie op die manier in die grond ingewas word nie.<\/li>\r\n \t
    3. Oppervlak-toedienings na onlangse bekalking waar vry-kalk en ho\u00eb pH in die bogrond voorkom sal vervlugtiging bevorder en behoort daarom vermy te word.<\/li>\r\n \t
    4. Die warmste gedeeltes van die dag en seisoen sal ammoniakverliese bevorder en daarom behoort ureum bevattende kunsmis of DAP nie dan uitgestrooi te word nie. Die uitstrooiing van ureum + urease inhibeerders kan wel by ho\u00eb temperature oorweeg word. Min verliese met KAN uitstrooiing by ho\u00eb temperature word verwag en daarom bly dit nog die beste opsie.<\/li>\r\n \t
    5. Meervoudige laer peile van ureum sal minder verliese as enkele ho\u00eb peile van oppervlak-toedienings tot gevolg h\u00ea.<\/li>\r\n \t
    6. Gebruik eerder KAN as ureum waar oppervlak-toedienings onvermydelik is en kunsmis nie ingewas kan word nie. Ureum wat met urease inhibeerders behandel is, kan ook oorweeg word, maar neem in ag dat vervlugtiging steeds meer sal wees as met KAN, dat KAN vinniger sal reageer op stikstof-tekorte in die grond en dat ho\u00ebr opbrengs steeds in die meerderheid van gevalle met KAN verwag word.<\/li>\r\n \t
    7. Vliegtuig-toedienings sal weens verskille in toedieningskostes waarskynlik veel duurder wees met KAN as met ureum of met ureum + urease inhibeerders. Onder sulke omstandighede is dit raadsaam om tydig ureum + urease inhibeerder toe te dien voordat die tekort aan stikstof drastiese afmetings aangeneem het.<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\nLet Wel: Raadpleeg \u2018n gekwalifiseerde landboukundige vir meer lokaliteit spesifieke toepassings. Die resultate waarna in hierdie artikel verwys word, is onder spesifieke omstandighede verkry en is daarom nie algemeen onder alle omstandighede toepasbaar nie.<\/strong>\r\n\r\nVerwysings\r\nADRIAANSE, F. G., 2012. Logingsverskille by stikstofbronne. S.A.Graan\/Grain, 11\/12.\r\nBOTHA, A.D.P. & PRETORIUS, D.C. 1988. Ammonia volatilization and denitrification losses from commercial fertilizers applied to soil samples. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil, 1988, 5(2), 89-91.\r\nCHAMBERS, B. & DAMPNEY, P, 2009. Nitrogen efficiency and ammonia emissions from urea-based and ammonium nitrate fertilisers. International Fertiliser Society Conference, Cambridge, 10th December 2009. IFA, ISBN 978-0-85310-294-6 (ISSN 1466-1314)\r\nDU PREEZ C C, DU T BURGER, R. 1986. A proposed mechanism for the volatilization of ammonia from fertilized neutral to alkaline soils. S. Afr. J. Plant Soil, 1986, 3(1), 31-34.\r\n\r\nFANTANETTO H. 1995., Ciencia del Suelo, INTA, Argentina.\r\nFENN L. B. & MIYAMOTO S., 1981. Ammonia loss and associated reactions of urea in calcareous soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am J. 45:537-540.\r\nHOEFT. R.G., NAFZIGER. E.D., JOHNSON. R.R.& ALDRICH. S.R., 2000. Modern Corn and Soybeen Production pp 139. MCSP Publications, 1520, Yorkshire Dr, Champaign, IL, USA.\r\nSCHWAB, G.J. AND MURDOCK, L.W. 2010. Enhanced-Efficiency Nitrogen Fertilizer for Corn and Wheat Production. IFA International Conference on Enhanced-Efficiency Fertilizers, Miami, International Fertilizer Industry Association, Paris, France.","_af_post_name":"die-verskil-in-toksisiteit-tussen-kan-en-ureum","_af_post_excerpt":"","_af_post_title":"Verskille in vervlugtiging tussen Stikstofbronne","_fr_post_content":"","_fr_post_name":"","_fr_post_excerpt":"","_fr_post_title":"","_pt_post_content":"","_pt_post_name":"","_pt_post_excerpt":"","_pt_post_title":"","edit_language":"fr","footnotes":""},"categories":[14,6,15,5],"tags":[98,104,105,100,101,102,106,97,96,103,99],"class_list":["post-16","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-fertilizer-products","category-nitrogen","category-nitrogen-fertilizer-products","category-fertilizers","tag-agrotain","tag-ammonium-sulphate","tag-dap","tag-erik-adriaanse","tag-fg-adriaanse","tag-lan","tag-map","tag-n-volatilization","tag-nitrogen-volatilization","tag-urea","tag-urease-inhibitors"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/15"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16"}],"version-history":[{"count":25,"href":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1357,"href":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16\/revisions\/1357"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1347"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/agrispex.co.za\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}