Wartość nawozowa pofermentu i gnojowicy Włochy 2016

background image

Europ.

J.

Agronomy

73

(2016)

34–41

Contents

lists

available

at

ScienceDirect

European

Journal

of

Agronomy

j

o u r n a

l

h o

m e

p a g e :

w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / e j a

Nitrogen

fertilizer

replacement

value

of

undigested

liquid

cattle

manure

and

digestates

Daniele

Cavalli

a

,

,

Giovanni

Cabassi

b

,

Lamberto

Borrelli

b

,

Gabriele

Geromel

a

,

Luca

Bechini

a

,

Luigi

Degano

b

,

Pietro

Marino

Gallina

a

a

Dipartimento

di

Scienze

Agrarie

e

Ambientali—Produzione,

Territorio,

Agroenergia,

Università

degli

Studi

di

Milano,

Milano,

Italy

b

Consiglio

per

la

ricerca

in

agricoltura

e

l’analisi

dell’economia

agraria

(CREA–FLC),

Lodi,

Italy

a

r

t

i

c

l

e

i

n

f

o

Article

history:

Received

24

February

2015

Received

in

revised

form

13

October

2015

Accepted

21

October

2015

Available

online

11

November

2015

Keywords:
Apparent

nitrogen

recovery

Mineral

fertilizer

equivalency

Residual

nitrogen

effects

Animal

slurry

Anaerobic

digestion

Liquid

fraction

Solid

fraction

Catch

crop

a

b

s

t

r

a

c

t

Accurate

estimation

of

animal

manure

nitrogen

(N)

availability

is

required

to

maximize

crop

N

use

effi-

ciency

and

reduce

environmental

N

losses.

Many

field

and

laboratory

experiments

have

shown

that

first-year

net

mineralization

of

manure

organic

N

is

often

negligible,

which

often

causes

crop

available

N

to

approximate

the

ammonium

N

content

of

the

manure.

Anaerobic

digestion

increases

the

ammonium

share

and

reduces

the

C

to

organic

N

ratio

of

animal

manures,

potentially

increasing

their

N

fertilizer

value.

In

2011,

we

undertook

a

three-year

field

experiment

in

Northern

Italy

to

estimate

the

N

fertilizer

value

of

four

manures:

undigested

cattle

slurry,

digested

cattle

slurry-maize

mix,

and

liquid

and

solid

fractions

of

the

digested

slurry-maize

mix.

The

experiment

also

allowed

us

to

test

if

ammonium

recovery

was

similar

among

manures,

and

between

manures

and

ammonium

sulphate.

Fertilizers

were

applied

annually

to

plots

before

silage

maize

cultivation

that

was

followed

by

an

unfertilized

Italian

ryegrass

crop.

Results

showed

that

the

recovery

of

ammonium

from

manure

in

maize

did

not

differ

significantly

compared

to

ammonium

sulphate

among

all

the

fertilizers

in

2013;

however,

in

2011

and

2012

it

was

significantly

lower

for

all

manures

except

digested

slurry-maize

mix

and

its

liquid

fraction

in

2011.

The

increased

recovery

of

applied

N

in

2012

and

2013

for

solid

fraction

and

undigested

manure

were

likely

due

to

the

residual

effect

of

previously

applied

organic

N.

©

2015

Elsevier

B.V.

All

rights

reserved.

1.

Introduction

The

efficiency

of

plants

to

take

up

nitrogen

(N)

from

undigested

manures

and

anaerobic

digestion

by-products

(digestates)

is

usu-

ally

assessed

through

apparent

N

recovery

(ANR)

and

N

fertilizer

replacement

value

(NFRV)

calculations.

The

ANR

represents

the

fraction

of

applied

total

N

that

can

be

taken

up

by

the

crop

in

addition

to

what

is

taken

up

by

an

unfertilized

control

in

a

single

season

after

fertilizer

application.

NFRV

also

known

as

the

mineral

fertilizer

equivalency

equals

the

organic

fertilizer

ANR

divided

by

the

mineral

fertilizer

ANR

(

Schröder,

2005

).

Both

indices

can

also

be

calculated

for

ammonium-N

(NH

4

-N)

provided

by

different

manures.

Many

laboratory

incubations

(

Bechini

and

Marino,

2009;

Morvan

et

al.,

2006;

Van

Kessel

and

Reeves,

2002

)

and

field

∗ Corresponding

author.

Fax:

+39

0250316575.

E-mail

address:

daniele.cavalli@unimi.it

(D.

Cavalli).

experiments

involving

untreated

(

Reijs

et

al.,

2007;

Schröder

et

al.,

2005,

2013;

Sørensen

et

al.,

2003

)

and

digested

manures

(

Chantigny

et

al.,

2008;

de

Boer,

2008;

Herrmann

et

al.,

2013;

Möller

et

al.,

2008;

Saunders

et

al.,

2012;

Sieling

et

al.,

2013;

Schröder

et

al.,

2007

)

have

shown

that

first-year

crop

available

N

often

approximates

the

NH

4

-

N

content

of

manure

(

Möller

and

Müller,

2012;

Webb

et

al.,

2013

),

and

thus

NFRV

approximately

equals

the

manure

NH

4

-N

to

total

N

ratio.

The

relevance

of

the

contribution

of

manure

organic

N

to

plant

nutrition

becomes

more

important

when

manure

is

applied

repeat-

edly

to

the

soil

during

consecutive

years.

In

such

cases,

the

slow

mineralization

of

previously

applied

organic

N,

and

the

remineral-

ization

of

immobilized

manure

NH

4

-N,

can

substantially

increase

the

NFRV

of

manures

during

subsequent

years

(

Gutser

et

al.,

2005;

Schröder

et

al.,

2005,

2007;

Nevens

and

Reheul,

2005;

Hernández

et

al.,

2013

).

Digestates

typically

have

high

NH

4

-N

to

total

N

ratios

that

raise

their

potential

N

availability

for

crops

(

Gutser

et

al.,

2005;

Möller

and

Müller,

2012

).

Nowadays,

digestates

often

consist

of

animal

manures

co-digested

with

other

biomasses

used

to

increase

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2015.10.007

1161-0301/©

2015

Elsevier

B.V.

All

rights

reserved.

background image

D.

Cavalli

et

al.

/

Europ.

J.

Agronomy

73

(2016)

34–41

35

methane

production

(

Holm-Nielsen

et

al.,

2009

).

Moreover,

to

facil-

itate

the

fertilizer

use

of

both

digested

and

raw

manures,

their

liquid

and

solid

fractions

are

separated

(

Burton,

2007;

Hjorth

et

al.,

2010;

Møller

et

al.,

2000;

Möller

and

Müller,

2012

).

In

fact,

separation

makes

export

of

the

solid

fraction

off

the

farm

easy,

which

permits

an

efficient

strategy

to

reduce

N

and

phosphorus

loads

per

unit

of

land

area

where

it

is

high.

Both

co-digestion

and

solid–liquid

sep-

aration

can

influence

digestate

N

availability

for

crops

(

Möller

and

Müller,

2012

).

Experiments

that

evaluate

the

NFRVs

of

unseparated

digested

and

co-digested

manures

and

their

solid

or

liquid

fractions

are

still

scarce

(

Chantigny

et

al.,

2008;

Grigatti

et

al.,

2011

);

further

research

is

needed

to

better

assess

their

N

supply

for

crop,

as

well

as

across

years.

To

this

end,

we

established

a

field

experiment

in

2011

(

Cavalli

et

al.,

2014

)

to

measure

the

NFRV

of

undigested

and

digested

cattle

manure

named

SINBION-field,

in

which

silage

maize

was

fertilized

with

ammonium

sulphate

(AS),

untreated

cattle

slurry

(US),

unsep-

arated

digestate

from

a

mix

of

cattle

slurry

and

maize

(DSMM),

and

the

liquid

(LF)

and

solid

(SF)

fractions

of

DSMM.

In

this

experiment

we

measured

ANR

and

NFRV

of

the

applied

manures

and

tested

several

hypotheses

regarding

the

effects

during

the

first

year

after

their

application:

i)

applied

NH

4

-N

recovery

is

similar

among

manures;

ii)

applied

NH

4

-N

recovery

is

similar

for

manures

and

AS;

iii)

first-year

NFRV

of

manures

can

be

approximated

by

their

NH

4

-

N

to

total

N

ratio

(i.e.,

most

manure

ammonium

is

available

in

the

first

year

after

application;

part

of

the

inevitable

N

loss

is

compensated

for

by

mineralized

N

from

the

easily

decompos-

able

N

fraction

of

the

manure).

Cavalli

et

al.

(2014)

found

that

ammonium

applied

to

the

soil

with

US,

SF,

and

LF

was

less

available

for

maize

than

that

of

AS.

They

also

observed

that

recovery

of

applied

N

with

SF

and

US

increased

in

the

second

year,

suggesting

that

N

residual

effects

contributed

to

maize

N

uptake.

Herein

we

report

the

third-year

results

of

data

with

in-season

measurements

of

maize

biomass,

maize

N

uptake,

and

soil

mineral

N.

Our

aims

are:

to

enhance

the

understanding

of

N

dynamics

in

a

soil-crop

system,

and

to

discuss

the

cumulative

effects

of

repeated

treatments.

2.

Material

and

methods

2.1.

Experimental

site

and

design

The

three-year

field

experiment

started

in

spring

2011

on

a

flat

area

located

in

Montanaso

Lombardo

(Lodi),

Italy

(45

20

32

N,

9

26

43

E,

altitude

80

m

asl).

The

field

had

been

cultivated

with

bar-

ley

(Hordeum

vulgare

L.)

and

silage

maize

(Zea

mays

L.)

prior

to

the

start

of

the

experiment.

No

organic

fertilizers

had

been

applied

in

the

previous

ten

years.

The

0–30

cm

soil

profile

of

the

field

displayed

the

following

characteristics:

sand,

469

g

kg

−1

,

silt,

394

g

kg

−1

,

clay,

137

g

kg

−1

;

pH

(H

2

O)

of

5.8;

total

N,

1.01

and

organic

C,

8.44

(both

g

kg

−1

);

extractable

P,

61

mg

kg

−1

per

Bray

and

Kurtz

method;

exchange-

able

K,

167

mg

kg

−1

;

bulk

density,

1.49

t

m

−3

.

The

climate

of

the

area

(average

1993–2010)

is

characterized

by

an

annual

rainfall

of

875

mm

and

an

average

annual

mean

air

temperature

of

13.4

C

(

Fig.

1

).

In

spring

2011,

an

experiment

was

established

in

plots

of

112

m

2

arranged

in

a

randomized

block

design

with

four

replicates,

and

involving

six

treatments:

an

unfertilized

control

(CON),

ammonium

sulphate

(AS)

and

four

manure

varieties

(

Table

1

).

Every

year,

at

no

more

than

a

week

before

spreading,

the

manures

were

sampled

to

determine

the

correct

application

rate.

To

ensure

that

NH

4

-N

recovery

across

treatments

could

be

com-

pared

later,

the

application

rate

was

calculated

to

deliver

the

same

amount

of

NH

4

-N

to

all

fertilized

treatments.

Furthermore,

the

amount

of

NH

4

-N

distributed

to

all

treatments

was

set

equal

to

that

supplied

by

US

when

applied

at

340

kg

N

ha

−1

.

Effective

NH

4

-

N

application

rates

deviated

from

intended

rates

(represented

by

those

of

AS

in

Table

2

)

mainly

because

estimated

manure-N

concen-

trations

at

the

preliminary

sampling

and

at

the

time

of

spreading

were

not

equal.

The

CON

and

AS

plots

received

triple

super-

phosphate

(40

kg

P

ha

−1

)

and

potassium

chloride

(230

kg

K

ha

−1

)

fertilizers

before

sowing.

On

31

May

2011,

DSMM,

LF,

and

US

were

Table

2

Total

N

and

NH

4

-N

(kg

N

ha

−1

)

applied

before

maize

sowing

in

2011–2013

with

ammonium

sulphate

and

manures.

Year

Treatment

a

AS

DSMM

LF

SF

US

Total

N

2011

159

264

218

643

200

2012

152

306

291

606

271

2013

131

250

213

703

214

NH

4

-N

2011

159

120

111

151

106

2012

152

142

147

226

136

2013

131

125

109

190

111

a

AS:

ammonium

sulphate;

DSMM:

unseparated

digestate

from

a

mix

of

cattle

slurry

and

maize;

LF:

liquid

fraction

of

DSMM;

SF:

solid

fraction

of

DSMM;

US:

untreated

cattle

slurry.

Table

1

Chemical–physical

characteristics

of

the

manures

used

in

the

field

experiment

(average

±

standard

deviation).

Manure

a

Year

DM

b

pH

(water)

Organic

C

Total

N

NH

4

-N

Organic

C/organic

N

NH

4

-N/total

N

(g

kg

−1

)

(g

kg

−1

DM)

DSMM

2011

65.1

8.0

±

0.0

395.8

±

5.8

55.9

±

0.3

25.5

±

0.3

13.0

45.6

2012

61.3

8.2

±

0.0

389.4

±

0.3

61.3

±

0.3

28.6

±

0.1

11.9

46.6

2013

57.8

8.1

±

0.0

368.7

±

0.2

64.2

±

0.2

32.0

±

0.2

11.5

49.9

LF

2011

47.9

8.0

±

0.0

363.6

±

2.2

67.0

±

0.1

34.2

±

0.0

11.1

51.1

2012

53.6

7.9

±

0.0

383.6

±

4.3

65.2

±

0.0

32.9

±

0.1

11.9

50.5

2013

40.8

8.3

±

0.0

357.4

±

1.9

67.0

±

0.0

34.3

±

0.5

10.9

51.3

SF

2011

256.5

9.6

±

0.0

439.8

±

5.5

21.9

±

0.2

5.1

±

0.0

26.2

23.4

2012

296.3

9.0

±

0.2

436.7

±

4.5

20.9

±

0.4

7.8

±

0.3

33.3

37.3

2013

276.0

9.8

±

0.1

431.6

±

5.2

22.9

±

0.9

6.2

±

0.3

25.8

27.0

US

2011

82.3

7.3

±

0.0

436.4

±

1.3

39.2

±

0.2

20.8

±

0.2

23.7

53.0

2012

84.2

7.3

±

0.0

427.7

±

5.8

43.1

±

0.3

21.7

±

0.1

20.0

50.4

2013

37.5

7.9

±

0.0

407.0

±

0.6

57.4

±

0.1

29.7

±

0.2

14.7

51.8

a

DSMM:

unseparated

digestate

from

a

mix

of

cattle

slurry

and

maize;

LF:

liquid

fraction

of

DSMM;

SF:

solid

fraction

of

DSMM;

US:

untreated

cattle

slurry.

b

Dry

matter,

single

determination.

background image

36

D.

Cavalli

et

al.

/

Europ.

J.

Agronomy

73

(2016)

34–41

2011

2012

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

J

F

M

A

M

J

J

A

S

O

N

D

Pre

ci

p

it

a

tion

(mm

)

M

ean

air

tem

perat

u

re

C

)

Mon

ths and

da

ys

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

J

F

M

A

M

J

J

A

S

O

N

D

P

reci

p

it

a

tion

(mm

)

M

ean

a

ir

tem

perat

u

re

(

°C)

Mon

ths and

da

ys

2013

2014

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

J

F

M

A

M

J

J

A

S

O

N

D

P

reci

p

it

a

tion

(mm)

M

ean

ai

r

te

m

perat

u

re

(

°C)

Mon

ths and

da

ys

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

J

F

M

A

M

J

J

A

S

O

N

D

P

reci

p

it

a

tion

(mm)

M

ean

ai

r

te

m

perat

u

re

(

°C)

Mon

ths and

da

ys

Air t

empera

ture 2011-2014

Air t

empera

ture 1993-2010

Preci

pitati

ons

2011-2

014

Preci

pitati

ons

1993-2

010

Fig.

1.

Daily

mean

air

temperature

and

accumulated

monthly

precipitation

in

Montanaso

Lombardo

(Italy).

Vertical

grey

bars

represent

fertilizer

spreading

and

maize

harvest

days.

applied

using

a

trailing

hose

spreader

and

were

incorporated

within

minutes

into

the

soil

with

a

rotary

harrow

(depth

10

cm).

On

17

May

2012

and

12

June

2013,

liquid

slurries

were

injected

to

a

depth

of

15

cm

using

a

Xerion

3800

Saddle

Trac

(Claas,

Harsewinkel,

Germany)

equipped

with

a

15

m

3

SGT

tanker

and

injector

system

TILL-R8

(Mainardi,

Cremona,

Italy)

composed

of

eight

elements

located

70

cm

distance

from

each

other.

On

the

same

dates,

chem-

ical

fertilizers

and

SF

were

hand

spread

and

incorporated

into

the

soil

with

a

rotary

harrow

within

minutes.

The

day

after

fertilization,

the

field

was

ploughed

to

30

cm,

har-

rowed,

and

sown

with

maize

within

three

days

(Hybrid

PR33M15,

Pioneer

Hi-Bred

Italia

S.r.l.)

at

a

between-row

distance

of

70

cm

and

a

planting

density

of

7.1

plants

m

−2

.

The

field

was

surface-irrigated

according

to

irrigation

water

availability

and

precipitations.

The

whole

maize

plants

were

harvested

for

silage

on

the

following

dates:

13

September

2011,

30

August

2012,

and

3

October

2013.

Within

two

weeks

post

maize

harvest,

the

field

was

sown

with

Italian

ryegrass

(Lolium

multiflorum

Lam.,

cultivar

Asso)

without

additional

fertilizer

applications.

The

stand

of

Italian

ryegrass

grew

until

it

was

harvested

on

10

May

2012,

23

May

2013,

and

14

May

2014.

2.2.

Manure

collection

and

analysis

The

DSMM

came

from

a

biogas

plant

and

was

a

mix

of

cattle

slurry

co-digested

with

silage

maize

(about

30%

on

a

fresh

matter

basis)

and

beet

pulp

or

tomato

peels

(about

1%

on

a

fresh

matter

basis).

The

liquid

and

solid

fractions

(LF

and

SF)

of

DSMM

were

obtained

after

screw

press

mechanical

separation.

The

US

was

col-

lected

from

a

second

farm

where

the

storage

tank

lay

beneath

the

litter-free,

gridded

stable

floor.

Dry

matter

(DM)

content,

organic

C,

total

N,

and

NH

4

-N

concentration

of

the

manures

were

determined

per

Cavalli

et

al.

(2014)

and

are

reported

in

Table

1

.

Volatile

fatty

acids

(VFA)

were

determined

by

HPLC

(

Ewen,

2011

)

after

steam

dis-

tillation

according

to

procedure

DIN

38414–19

(1999)

(

Fig.

2

).

Ash

content

was

measured

after

incineration

in

a

muffle

at

550

C

(

AOAC

International,

1995

)

(

Fig.

2

).

Ash-free

neutral

detergent

fiber

(NDF),

acid

detergent

fiber

(ADF),

and

acid

detergent

lignin

(ADL)

were

all

determined

in

dried

samples

ground

to

pass

1

mm

screen

accord-

ing

to

the

procedures

of

Mertens

(2002)

,

Van

Soest

et

al.

(1991)

and

Van

Soest

(1963)

,

respectively,

using

an

Ankom

200

fiber

analyzer

(Ankom

Technology

Corp.,

Fairport,

NY).

Hemicellulose

was

calcu-

lated

as

the

difference

between

NDF

and

ADF,

while

cellulose

was

calculated

as

the

difference

between

ADF

and

ADL.

Soluble

organic

matter

was

figured

as

the

DM

not

recovered

in

ash,

VFA

and

NDF

fractions

(

Fig.

2

).

2.3.

Above

ground

biomass

sampling

and

analysis

Above

ground

biomass

(AGB)

of

maize

was

sampled

at

the

following

phenological

stages

(

Ritchie

et

al.,

1996

):

V3,

V6,

V9,

flowering

(R1),

and

dent

maturity

(R5

harvest

stage

for

silage

pro-

duction).

The

AGB

of

Italian

ryegrass

was

sampled

at

harvest

when

it

was

completely

removed

from

the

field.

Crop

sampling

was

done

background image

D.

Cavalli

et

al.

/

Europ.

J.

Agronomy

73

(2016)

34–41

37

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

DSMM

LF

SF

US

%

D

ry

ma

tter

Soluble

matter

Volatile f

atty acids

Hemicellulose

Cellulose

Lignin

Ash

Fig.

2.

Dry

matter

fractions

of

the

applied

manures.

The

soluble

fraction

was

esti-

mated

as

DM

unaccounted

for

in

the

other

fractions

(average

±

standard

deviation).

DSMM:

unseparated

digestate

from

a

mix

of

cattle

slurry

and

maize;

LF:

liquid

fraction

of

DSMM;

SF:

solid

fraction

of

DSMM;

US:

untreated

cattle

slurry.

according

to

Cavalli

et

al.

(2014)

with

the

exception

of

harvests

at

V3-R1

when

15

instead

of

40

plants

plot

−1

were

sampled.

Each

year,

maize

plant

density

was

measured

in

each

plot

at

V6;

the

average

value

for

the

three

years

was

6.9

±

0.3

plants

m

−2

.

2.4.

Soil

sampling

and

analysis

Soil

samples

(0–30

cm

layer)

were

collected

from

each

plot

before

fertilization

(year

2011)

and

at

each

date

when

AGB

was

estimated;

additional

samples

from

the

30–60

cm

profile

were

collected

after

maize

harvest

(3

October

2013)

and

after

Italian

rye-

grass

harvest

(14

May

2014).

Methods

of

soil

sampling

and

analysis

are

reported

in

Cavalli

et

al.

(2014)

.

2.5.

Calculations

and

statistical

analyses

Subtracting

maize

(or

Italian

ryegrass)

N

uptake

in

CON

from

maize

(or

Italian

ryegrass)

N

uptake

in

the

fertilized

treatment

separately

for

each

experimental

block

and

dividing

the

result

by

the

N

applied

results

in

an

apparent

N

recovery

value

(ANR).

This

calculation

was

done

considering

as

the

denominator

either

the

total

N

or

the

NH

4

-N

applied

to

obtain

ANR

and

ANR

NH4-N

,

respec-

tively.

Both

indices

were

calculated

for

season

one

(2011–2012),

two

(2012–2013),

and

three

(2013–2014).

An

analysis

of

variance

(ANOVA)

was

performed

separately

for

each

year,

crop,

and

sampling

date

using

the

SPSS

procedure

UNI-

ANOVA

(SPSS

Version

22.0.0).

Mean

separation

was

conducted

with

the

HSD

Tukey

test

(P

<

0.05).

The

treatment

was

considered

a

fixed

factor,

while

the

block

was

random.

The

homogeneity

of

variances

was

evaluated

using

the

Levene

test

(P

<

0.05).

Within

the

text,

sig-

nificant

effects

of

fertilizer

application

are

reported

when

the

P

value

is

below

0.05.

3.

Results

3.1.

Above

ground

biomass

and

nitrogen

uptake

In

2012

and

2013,

as

opposed

to

2011,

AS

and

manure

appli-

cations

significantly

increased

maize

AGB

compared

to

CON

on

most

dates

from

V3

to

flowering

(

Table

3

).

Maize

AGB

differences

among

fertilized

treatments

occurred

at

harvest

in

2011

(US

<AS

and

DSMM)

and

2012

(US,

SF,

and

LF

were

lower

than

AS),

but

dis-

appeared

completely

in

2013.

During

the

three

years

no

significant

differences

were

found

for

the

AGB

of

Italian

ryegrass

among

AS,

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0

5

10

15

20

25

)

M

D
%(

t

n

et

n

o

c
N

s

s

a

m

oi

b
d

u

or

g

e

v

o

b

A

Aboveground

biomass (t DM ha

-1

)

CON

AS

DSMM

LF

SF

US

%N max

%N critical

%N

min

Fig.

3.

Nitrogen

concentration

in

above

ground

maize

biomass

versus

above

ground

biomass

in

Montanaso

Lombardo

(Italy)

over

three

years

with

five

sampling

dates

per

year.

CON:

unfertilized

soil;

AS:

ammonium

sulphate;

DSMM:

unseparated

digestate

from

a

mix

of

cattle

slurry

and

maize;

LF:

liquid

fraction

of

DSMM;

SF:

solid

fraction

of

DSMM;

US:

untreated

cattle

slurry.

Nmax,

Ncritical,

and

Nmin

are

the

three

N

dilution

curves

proposed

for

maize

by

Plénet

and

Lemaire

(1999)

.

DSMM,

LF,

or

US;

on

the

contrary,

application

of

SF

enhanced

Italian

ryegrass

AGB

compared

to

AS

and

the

other

manures

(

Table

3

).

Maize

N

uptake

(

Table

4

)

followed

a

similar

trend

to

that

of

AGB.

In

2012

and

2013,

N

uptake

in

fertilized

treatments

was

significantly

higher

than

CON

on

all

sampling

dates

with

few

exceptions.

As

observed

for

AGB

at

maize

harvest

in

2013,

differ-

ences

in

N

uptake

between

AS

and

manures,

and

among

manures,

disappeared.

Application

of

SF

increased

(although

not

always

significantly)

N

uptake

of

Italian

ryegrass

compared

to

other

treat-

ments

in

all

three

growing

seasons

(

Table

4

).

Fig.

3

reports

the

relationship

between

maize

AGB

and

its

N

con-

centration,

as

well

as

critical,

minimum,

and

maximum

N

dilution

curves

(

Plénet

and

Lemaire,

1999

).

Most

treatments

were

already

N

deficient

from

the

first

stages

of

plant

growth,

as

indicated

by

the

dots

beneath

the

critical

N

curve.

Only

AS

and

DSMM

were

fre-

quently

found

above

the

critical

curve

until

R1,

after

which

these

treatments

were

slightly

N-limited

at

crop

harvest.

3.2.

Apparent

nitrogen

recovery

and

nitrogen

fertilizer

replacement

value

Across

the

three

years,

ANR

in

maize

was

significantly

higher

in

AS

(68–82%)

compared

to

manure-fertilized

treatments,

with

the

exception

of

LF

in

2013

(

Fig.

4

).

In

the

2013–2014

season,

ANR

from

LF

in

maize

was

34%

higher

than

that

in

the

treatment

with

the

lowest

ANR

value

(SF),

while

ANR

in

Italian

ryegrass

did

not

differ

among

treatments

(on

average

4%).

In

the

same

growing

sea-

son,

on

average

ANR

NH4-N

in

maize

was

77%,

without

significant

differences

among

treatments,

while

ANR

NH4-N

in

Italian

ryegrass

was

significantly

higher

in

SF

compared

to

AS

(+11%).

Opposed

to

AS

and

DSMM

that

showed

an

almost

constant

ANR

and

ANR

NH4-N

across

years,

the

trend

of

ANR

and

ANR

NH4-N

in

maize

for

SF

and

US

increased

consistently

from

the

first

to

second

growing

season;

for

these

two

treatments

the

results

for

the

third

growing

season

were

similar

to

the

second

one.

Similar

to

observations

of

ANR

NH4-N

,

in

2013

there

were

no

sig-

nificant

differences

in

NFRV

NH4-N

among

the

treatments

(

Fig.

5

).

In

the

same

year,

NFRV

was

still

higher

in

LF

compared

to

SF.

background image

38

D.

Cavalli

et

al.

/

Europ.

J.

Agronomy

73

(2016)

34–41

Table

3

Above

ground

dry

matter

of

maize

and

Italian

ryegrass

(t

DM

ha

−1

)

as

a

result

of

fertilization

during

three

growing

seasons

at

Montanaso

Lombardo

(Italy).

Letters

indicate

significant

differences

among

treatments

within

year

and

sampling

date

(P

<

0.05)

(HSD

Tukey

test).

Season

Crop

development

stage

a

Date

Treatment

b

CON

AS

DSMM

LF

SF

US

2011–2012

Maize

V3

06/20/2011

0.04a

0.04a

0.03a

0.04a

0.04a

0.03a

Maize

V6

06/29/2011

0.3ab

0.3b

0.3ab

0.3ab

0.2ab

0.2a

Maize

V9

07/12/2011

2.5a

2.8a

2.3a

2.4a

2.7a

2.1a

Maize

R1

08/06/2011

10.7a

11.7a

9.4a

10.1a

10.6a

9.0a

Maize

R5

09/13/2011

18.6ab

22.3b

22.3b

19.9ab

17.8ab

16.5a

Italian

ryegrass

harvest

05/10/2012

5.6a

7.1b

7.2b

7.0b

8.6c

6.6ab

2012–2013

Maize

V3

06/08/2012

0.03a

0.05b

0.06b

0.05b

0.05b

0.05b

Maize

V6

06/18/2012

0.4a

0.7b

0.9b

0.8b

0.7b

0.8b

Maize

V9

07/02/2012

2.0a

5.1c

4.4bc

4.3bc

3.8b

3.9b

Maize

R1

05/25/2012

6.1a

14.0c

12.0bc

10.6b

10.4b

10.6b

Maize

R5

08/30/2012

12.3a

24.1e

22.9de

20.0bc

21.2cd

19.1b

Italian

ryegrass

harvest

05/23/2013

3.3a

3.8a

4.2a

4.5ab

5.5b

4.2a

2013–2014

Maize

V3

07/01/2013

0.01a

0.01ab

0.02bc

0.02cd

0.03d

0.02cd

Maize

V6

07/15/2013

0.2a

0.3ab

0.4b

0.5bc

0.6c

0.4b

Maize

V9

07/22/2013

0.6a

1.1b

1.3b

1.6c

1.6c

1.1b

Maize

R1

08/13/2013

5.7a

10.1bc

10.4bc

11.3c

11.1c

7.9ab

Maize

R5

10/03/2013

12.0a

19.9b

21.4b

20.8b

21.1b

18.2b

Italian

ryegrass

harvest

05/14/2014

0.8a

1.3ab

1.8ab

2.0ab

3.7c

2.1b

a

V3:

maize

third

leaf;

V6:

maize

sixth

leaf;

V9:

maize

nineth

leaf;

R1:

maize

flowering;

R5:

maize

dent

maturity

(silage

harvest).

b

CON:

unfertilized

soil;

AS:

ammonium

sulphate;

DSMM:

unseparated

digestate

from

a

mix

of

cattle

slurry

and

maize;

LF:

liquid

fraction

of

DSMM;

SF:

solid

fraction

of

DSMM;

US:

untreated

cattle

slurry.

3.3.

Soil

mineral

nitrogen

SMN

dynamics

during

the

maize

growing

season

was

similar

in

all

treatments;

SMN

concentration

increased

from

pre-planting

to

V3

or

V6,

and

then

strongly

decreased

from

V9

onward

until

it

reached

a

rather

low

level

at

maize

harvest

(

Table

5

).

After

maize

harvest

in

September

2012

and

October

2013,

and

Italian

ryegrass

harvest

in

May

2013,

application

of

SF

significantly

increased

post-harvest

SMN

concentration

(in

the

0–30

cm

soil

layer)

compared

to

other

treatments.

4.

Discussion

Our

hypothesis

that

ammonium-N

recovery

is

similar

among

manures

was

not

confirmed

in

2011

when

ANR

NH4-N

of

DSMM

was

significantly

higher

than

that

of

SF

and

US

(

Fig.

4

),

however,

it

was

confirmed

in

the

other

two

years.

Differences

in

ANR

NH4-N

values

were

observed

between

manures

and

AS

for

LF

in

2012

and

for

SF

and

US

in

2011

and

2012

(

Fig.

4

),

which

contradicted

our

hypothesis

that

manure

NH

4

-N

is

as

available

as

is

that

of

AS.

Contradiction

of

this

latter

hypothesis

for

SF

and

US

in

2011

and

2012

consequently

makes

false

our

last

hypothesis

that

first-year

NFRV

of

manures

is

similar

to

their

NH

4

-N

to

total

N

ratio.

In

fact,

NFRVs

of

US

and

SF

were

much

lower

than

their

NH

4

-N

to

total

N

ratios.

Conversely,

2013

US

results

were

more

consistent

with

the

hypothesis

of

equal

ANR

NH4-N

values

between

mineral

fertilizers

and

untreated

slurries

found

in

other

field

experiments

even

after

a

single

manure

application

(

Sørensen,

2004;

Schröder

et

al.,

2007,

2013

).

Moreover,

the

measured

ANR

NH4-N

of

SF

in

2013

was

con-

Table

4

Above

ground

N

uptake

of

maize

and

Italian

ryegrass

(kg

N

ha

−1

)

as

a

result

of

fertilization

during

three

growing

seasons

at

Montanaso

Lombardo

(Italy).

Letters

indicate

significant

differences

among

treatments

within

year

and

sampling

date

(P

<

0.05)

(HSD

Tukey

test).

Season

Crop

development

stage

a

Date

Treatment

b

CON

AS

DSMM

LF

SF

US

2011–2012

Maize

V3

06/20/2011

1.6a

1.7a

1.3a

1.4a

1.3a

1.2a

Maize

V6

06/29/2011

13ab

14b

11ab

11ab

8a

8a

Maize

V9

07/12/2011

55a

83b

57a

66ab

58a

49a

Maize

R1

08/06/2011

100a

177b

110a

146ab

124ab

102a

Maize

R5

09/13/2011

138a

247c

217bc

182ab

146a

131a

Italian

ryegrass

harvest

05/10/2012

42a

64b

60b

58b

78c

52ab

2012–2013

Maize

V3

06/08/2012

0.9a

2.1b

2.8b

2.3b

1.9b

2.3b

Maize

V6

06/18/2012

13a

28b

30b

27b

21b

26b

Maize

V9

07/02/2012

29a

112c

76b

75b

53b

54b

Maize

R1

05/25/2012

42a

179c

102b

99ab

92ab

80ab

Maize

R5

08/30/2012

78a

202e

170cd

152bc

183de

138b

Italian

ryegrass

harvest

05/23/2013

31a

34a

42ab

42ab

56b

40a

2013–2014

Maize

V3

07/01/2013

0.4a

0.6ab

0.7bc

0.9cd

1.2d

0.9cd

Maize

V6

07/15/2013

5a

12ab

13ab

18bc

22c

12ab

Maize

V9

07/22/2013

17a

38bc

38bc

47c

43c

30b

Maize

R1

08/13/2013

67a

172c

151c

165c

141bc

100ab

Maize

R5

10/03/2013

83a

180b

192b

191b

199b

151b

Italian

ryegrass

harvest

05/14/2014

9a

14a

17a

20a

37b

21a

a

V3:

maize

third

leaf;

V6:

maize

sixth

leaf;

V9:

maize

nineth

leaf;

R1:

maize

flowering;

R5:

maize

dent

maturity

(silage

harvest).

b

CON:

unfertilized

soil;

AS:

ammonium

sulphate;

DSMM:

unseparated

digestate

from

a

mix

of

cattle

slurry

and

maize;

LF:

liquid

fraction

of

DSMM;

SF:

solid

fraction

of

DSMM;

US:

untreated

cattle

slurry.

background image

D.

Cavalli

et

al.

/

Europ.

J.

Agronomy

73

(2016)

34–41

39

Sea

son 2011–2012

Season 2012

–2013

Season 2013

–2014

AN

R

(%

ap

pl

ie

d N)

d

c

bc

ab

a

b

ab

ab

a

a

D

C

BC

AB

A

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

AS

DSMM

LF

SF

US

Itali

an ryeg

rass

Mai

ze

b

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

B

A

A

A

A

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

AS

DSMM

LF

SF

US

c

ab

bc

a

ab

a

a

a

a

a

C

AB

BC

A

AB

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

AS

DSMM

LF

SF

US

AN

R

N

H4

–N

(%

ap

pl

ie

d NH

4

–N

)

c

c

bc

ab

a

ab

ab

ab

b

a

C

C

BC

AB

A

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

AS

DSMM

LF

SF

US

Italian ryeg

rass

Mai

ze

b

ab

a

a

a

a

ab

ab

b

ab

B

AB

A

A

A

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

AS

DSMM

LF

SF

US

a

a

a

a

a

a

ab

ab

b

ab

A

A

A

A

A

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

AS

DSMM

LF

SF

US

Fig.

4.

Apparent

recovery

at

harvest

of

applied

total

N

(ANR)

and

NH

4

-N

(ANR

NH4-N

)

in

maize

and

Italian

ryegrass

(%)

at

Montanaso

Lombardo

(Italy).

AS:

ammonium

sulphate;

DSMM:

unseparated

digestate

from

a

mix

of

cattle

slurry

and

maize;

LF:

liquid

fraction

of

DSMM;

SF:

solid

fraction

of

DSMM;

US:

untreated

cattle

slurry.

Letters

indicate

significant

differences

(P

<

0.05)

among

treatments

within

a

year

(HSD

Tukey

test).

Lowercase

letters

in

bold:

significant

differences

for

maize;

lowercase

letters

in

italic:

significant

differences

for

Italian

ryegrass;

uppercase

letters:

significant

differences

for

maize

plus

Italian

ryegrass.

sistent

with

the

range

reported

for

solid

cattle

manures

(12–63%)

by

Mu ˜

noz

et

al.

(2004)

.

Within

this

experiment,

the

N

rate

applied

in

AS

and

manure-

fertilized

treatments

was

expected

to

lie

in

a

linear

responsive

N

domain

(characterized

by

constant

ANR)

that

usually

extends

up

to

200

kg

N

ha

−1

(

Zavattaro

et

al.,

2012

)

for

silage

maize

culti-

vated

in

the

Po

Plain

in

Northern

Italy.

Thus,

we

anticipated

ANRs

and

NFRVs

not

to

be

substantially

affected

by

applied

NH

4

-N

rates

(at

most

226

kg

ha

−1

for

SF

in

2012)

(

Table

2

);

even

considering

residual

N

effects,

N

uptake

in

maize

did

not

exceed

200

kg

ha

−1

in

2012

and

2013

(

Table

4

).

Moreover,

the

AGB

and

its

N

con-

centration

(

Fig.

3

)

suggest

that

all

treatments

were

not

in

luxury

N

consumption,

which

means

that

ANR

and

NFRV

were

at

their

highest

possible

levels

under

the

pedological,

meteorological,

and

cropping

conditions

of

the

experiment.

Therefore,

we

consider

the

NFRVs

measured

in

this

experiment

to

be

of

practical

interest

to

better

define

N

management

plans

in

the

studied

area.

We

suggest

that

the

differences

in

ANRs

and

NFRVs

among

manures

in

the

three

years

were

mainly

due

to

differences

in

C

and

N

turnover

related

to

the

immobilization

of

mineral

N

and

the

mineralization

of

organic

N

in

the

first

and

subsequent

years

after

application,

assuming

negligible

losses

via

ammonia

volatilization

(due

to

incorporation

of

the

manures

within

minutes

after

applica-

tion

and

soil

pH

of

5.8;

Sommer

and

Hutchings,

2001

)

and

emissions

of

N

2

O

and

N

2

.

Indeed,

in

the

AS

treatment,

only

16–21%

of

the

applied

NH

4

-N

was

not

recovered

during

complete

crop

rotation

(

Fig.

4

),

which

suggests

that

substantial

losses

of

N

via

leaching

and

denitrification

did

not

occur.

Leaching

during

maize

growth

was

assumed

to

be

similar

in

all

fertilized

plots.

Year 20

11

Year 20

12

Year 20

13

NFR

V

(%

ap

pl

ie

d N)

b

ab

a

a

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

DSMM

LF

SF

US

b

b

a

ab

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

DSMM

LF

SF

US

ab

b

a

ab

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

DSMM

LF

SF

US

NFR

V

NH

4–N

(%

ap

pl

ie

d NH

4

–N

)

b

ab

a

a

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

DSMM

LF

SF

US

b

ab

a

a

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

DSMM

LF

SF

US

a

a

a

a

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

DSMM

LF

SF

US

Fig.

5.

Nitrogen

fertilizer

replacement

value

of

applied

total

N

(NFRV)

and

NH

4

-N

(NFRV

NH4-N

)

in

maize

(%)

at

Montanaso

Lombardo

(Italy).

DSMM:

unseparated

digestate

from

a

mix

of

cattle

slurry

and

maize;

LF:

liquid

fraction

of

DSMM;

SF:

solid

fraction

of

DSMM;

US:

untreated

cattle

slurry.

Significant

differences

(P

<

0.05)

among

treatments

within

a

year

are

indicated

by

letters

(HSD

Tukey

test).

background image

40

D.

Cavalli

et

al.

/

Europ.

J.

Agronomy

73

(2016)

34–41

Table

5

Soil

mineral

nitrogen

(SMN

in

kg

N

ha

−1

:

sum

of

NO

3

-N

and

NH

4

-N)

as

a

result

of

fertilization

during

three

growing

seasons

at

Montanaso

Lombardo

(Italy).

Letters

indicate

significant

differences

among

treatments

within

year

and

sampling

date

(P

<

0.05)

(HSD

Tukey

test).

Season

Sampling

a

Date

Treatment

b

CON

AS

DSMM

LF

SF

US

2011–2012

Pre-spreading

25/05/2011

36.6a

32.9a

35.1a

40.9a

36.7a

37.7a

Maize

V3

06/20/2011

44.8a

87.2b

73.6ab

79.2ab

45.8a

55.8ab

Maize

V6

06/29/2011

55.7a

93.5b

72.6ab

76.1ab

48.2a

54.6a

Maize

V9

07/12/2011

18.2a

54.9a

31.0a

27.4a

19.9a

23.8a

Maize

R1

08/06/2011

6.1a

14.9a

6.7a

17.4a

10.1a

6.0a

Maize

R5

09/13/2011

4.7a

11.7a

5.8a

5.9a

6.7a

5.5a

Italian

ryegrass

harvest

c

05/10/2012

2.1a

1.5a

0.8a

1.7a

3.7a

2.7a

2012–2013

Maize

V3

06/08/2012

23.5a

85.4a

83.0a

90.3a

39.9a

39.1a

Maize

V6

06/18/2012

26.8a

131.6b

37.0b

54.8b

38.2b

32.2b

Maize

V9

07/02/2012

20.2a

52.1a

25.5a

33.8a

39.7a

30.3a

Maize

R1

05/25/2012

8.2a

17.0a

11.6a

10.2a

16.4a

7.9a

Maize

R5

08/30/2012

11.4a

11.9a

13.2a

15.4a

27.6b

13.2a

Italian

ryegrass

harvest

05/23/2013

5.6a

5.9a

7.7ab

6.1a

9.6b

6.2a

2013–2014

Maize

V3

07/01/2013

35.6a

61.2b

58.4b

46.2ab

57.5b

58.9b

Maize

V6

07/15/2013

39.9a

63.0b

49.7ab

53.9ab

59.3b

45.2ab

Maize

V9

07/22/2013

55.3a

85.6a

58.9a

58.7a

74.7a

55.9a

Maize

R1

08/13/2013

11.0a

17.0a

11.4a

11.3a

14.2a

9.4a

Maize

R5

(0–30

cm)

10/03/2013

6.4a

7.6ab

9.8b

10.4b

13.6c

10.6b

Maize

R5

(30–60

cm)

10/03/2013

6.1a

7.1a

9.1ab

8.4a

12.1b

9.2ab

Italian

ryegrass

harvest

(0–30

cm)

05/14/2014

9.3a

9.9a

11.4a

12.0a

16.0a

17.1a

Italian

ryegrass

harvest

(30–60

cm)

05/14/2014

6.5a

5.0a

7.9a

8.9a

10.3a

10.3a

a

V3:

maize

third

leaf;

V6:

maize

sixth

leaf;

V9:

maize

nineth

leaf;

R1:

maize

flowering;

R5:

maize

dent

maturity

(silage

harvest).

b

CON:

unfertilized

soil;

AS:

ammonium

sulphate;

DSMM:

unseparated

digestate

from

a

mix

of

cattle

slurry

and

maize;

LF:

liquid

fraction

of

DSMM;

SF:

solid

fraction

of

DSMM;

US:

untreated

cattle

slurry.

c

Pre-spreading

SMN

concentrations

in

2012

and

2013

were

equal

to

those

measured

at

Italian

ryegrass

harvest.

Both

DSMM

and

LF

had

low

C

to

organic

N

ratios

(

Table

1

)

and

had

DMs

rich

in

soluble

compounds

(39–41%,

Fig.

2

).

Their

decom-

position

presumably

induced

low

N

immobilization

in

soil

(

Morvan

and

Nicolardot,

2009;

Möller

and

Müller,

2012

),

as

the

like

values

for

ANR

NH4-N

(

Fig.

4

)

in

all

three

years

in

these

treatments

(with

the

exception

of

LF

in

2012)

and

in

AS

demonstrated

(

Schröder

et

al.,

2007

).

On

the

contrary,

SF

and

US

presumably

induced

net

N

immobilization

in

soil

as

a

consequence

of

their

high

C

to

organic

N

ratios

and

the

highly

cellulosic

and

hemicellulosic

DMs

(

Morvan

and

Nicolardot,

2009;

Peters

and

Jensen,

2011;

Van

Kessel

et

al.,

2000

).

Moreover,

about

8%

of

US

DM

was

made

of

VFAs,

which

have

been

shown

to

promote

N

immobilization

during

microbial

decomposition

(

Kirchmann

and

Lundvall,

1993;

Sørensen,

1998

).

The

yearly

application

of

SF

and

US

from

2011

to

2013

increased

ANR

NH4-N

values

during

the

three

years,

such

that

the

2013

ANR

NH4-N

no

longer

differed

from

that

of

AS

(

Fig.

4

).

Such

marked

ANR

NH4-N

increase

in

2012

and

2013

for

SF

and

US

is

consistent

with

the

results

of

Nevens

and

Reheul

(2005)

,

and

might

be

ascribed

to

residual

N

effect,

i.e.,

to

the

mineralization

of

applied

organic

N

after

its

application

year

(

Sørensen,

2004;

Schröder

et

al.,

2005,

2013

).

Nitrogen

residual

effect

might

also

explain

several

other

findings:

(i)

higher

AGB

and

N

uptake

in

Italian

ryegrass

with

SF

compared

to

other

treatments

(

Tables

3

and

4

);

(ii)

the

increase

in

ANR

NH4-N

from

2011

to

2012

in

SF

and

US

was

higher

than

the

increase

in

ANR

NH4-N

measured

in

DSMM

and

LF

in

the

same

period

(as

shown

also

by

Schröder

et

al.

(2007)

);

(iii)

significantly

higher

SMN

at

maize

har-

vest

in

SF

compared

to

most

of

the

other

treatments

in

2012

and

2013.

Continuing

the

experiment

for

more

years

will

show

to

what

extent

the

residual

effect

continues

to

increase

N

recovery

in

US

and

SF

treatments.

Furthermore,

for

these

manures,

it

may

be

appropri-

ate

to

cultivate

a

catch

crop

to

intercept

overwinter

mineralized

N

(3–6%

of

applied

N

in

our

situation)

to

prevent

potential

N-leaching.

5.

Conclusions

For

manures

with

high

C

to

organic

N

ratios

(average

of

19

and

28

for

untreated

cattle

slurry

and

the

solid

fraction

of

digestate,

respectively),

the

results

made

evident

that

in

the

first

two

years

after

application,

when

residual

effects

are

not

yet

noticeable,

it

is

inadequate

to

estimate

the

NFRV

of

the

manures

as

equal

to

their

NH

4

-N

to

total

N

ratio.

In

fact,

in

such

cases,

net

N

mineralization

occurred

months

after

application,

necessitating

mineral

fertilizer

application

to

compensate

for

N

immobilization

to

satisfy

crop

N

requirements.

For

manures

with

lower

C

to

organic

N

ratios

(such

as

12

in

this

case

for

unseparated

digestate

from

a

cattle

slurry-maize

mix),

the

ammonium

to

total

N

ratio

of

the

manure

can

serve

as

a

proxy

for

the

NFRV

beginning

in

the

first

application

year.

Results

for

the

liq-

uid

fraction

of

the

digestate

were

intermediate,

despite

its

similar

C

to

organic

N

ratio

and

similar

fiber

composition

and

VFA

content

as

that

of

the

digestate.

Acknowledgements

We

gratefully

acknowledge

the

contributions

of

Prof.

Tommaso

Maggiore,

Prof.

Efisio

Piano,

and

Prof.

Pierluigi

Navarotto

in

concep-

tion

and

development

of

the

SINBION

project.

Research

work

was

carried

out

within

the

SINBION

project

(Sviluppo

di

sistemi

inte-

grati

sostenibili

per

il

recupero

dei

sottoprodotti

dell’agro-industria

e

dell’azienda

agraria

al

fine

di

ottimizzare

la

produzione

di

biogas

e

valorizzare

l’utilizzazione

agronomica

del

digestato;

Integrated

systems

for

biogas

and

nitrogen)

and

funded

by

the

Italian

Ministry

of

Agriculture

D.M.

n

27335/7303/10

(December

2

2012).

References

AOAC

International,

1995.

Official

Methods

of

Analysis,

16th

ed.

Association

of

Official

Analytical

Chemists,

Arlington,

USA.

Bechini,

L.,

Marino,

P.,

2009.

Short-term

nitrogen

fertilizing

value

of

liquid

dairy

manures

is

mainly

due

to

ammonium.

Soil

Sci.

Soc.

Am.

J.

73,

2159–2169.

Burton,

C.H.,

2007.

The

potential

contribution

of

separation

technologies

to

the

management

of

livestock

manure.

Livest.

Sci.

112,

208–216.

Cavalli,

D.,

Cabassi,

G.,

Borrelli,

L.,

Fuccella,

R.,

Degano,

L.,

Bechini,

L.,

Marino,

P.,

2014.

Nitrogen

fertiliser

value

of

digested

dairy

cow

slurry,

its

liquid

and

solid

fractions,

and

of

dairy

cow

slurry.

Ital.

J.

Agron.

9,

71–78.

background image

D.

Cavalli

et

al.

/

Europ.

J.

Agronomy

73

(2016)

34–41

41

Chantigny,

M.H.,

Angers,

D.A.,

Bélanger,

G.,

Rochette,

P.,

Eriksen-Hamel,

N.,

Bittman,

S.,

Buckley,

K.,

Massé,

D.,

Gasser,

M.,

2008.

Yield

and

nutrient

export

of

grain

corn

fertilized

with

raw

and

treated

liquid

swine

manure.

Agron.

J.

100,

1303–1309.

de

Boer,

H.C.,

2008.

Co-digestion

of

animal

slurry

can

increase

short-term

nitrogen

recovery

by

crops.

J.

Environ.

Qual.

37,

1968–1973.

Ewen,

A.,

2011.

Analysis

of

Carbohydrates,

Alcohols,

and

Organic

Acids

by

Ion-Exchange

Chromatography.

Application

Note

Si-01943:

Analyzing

Liquid

Fractions

of

Biogas

Processes

by

HPLC.

Agilent

Technologies,

Inc.,

USA.

Grigatti,

M.,

Di

Girolamo,

G.,

Chincarini,

R.,

Ciavatta,

C.,

Barbanti,

L.,

2011.

Potential

nitrogen

mineralization,

plant

utilization

efficiency

and

soil

CO

2

emissions

following

the

addition

of

anaerobic

digested

slurries.

Biomass

Bioenergy

35,

4619–4629.

Gutser,

R.,

Ebertseder,

Th.,

Weber,

A.,

Schraml,

M.,

Schmidhalter,

U.,

2005.

Short-term

and

residual

availability

of

nitrogen

after

long-term

application

of

organic

fertilizers

on

arable

land.

J.

Plant

Nutr.

Soil

Sci.

168,

439–446.

Hernández,

D.,

Polo,

A.,

Plaza,

C.,

2013.

Long-term

effects

of

pig

slurry

on

barley

yield

and

N

use

efficiency

under

semiarid

Mediterranean

conditions.

Eur.

J.

Agron.

44,

78–86.

Herrmann,

A.,

Sieling,

K.,

Wienforth,

B.,

Taube,

F.,

Kage,

H.,

2013.

Short-term

effects

of

biogas

residue

application

on

yield

performance

and

N

balance

parameters

of

maize

in

different

cropping

systems.

J.

Agric.

Sci.

151,

449–462.

Hjorth,

M.,

Christensen,

K.V.,

Christensen,

M.L.,

Sommer,

S.G.,

2010.

Solid–liquid

separation

of

animal

slurry

in

theory

and

practice.

A

review.

Agron.

Sustain.

Dev.

30,

153–180.

Holm-Nielsen,

J.B.,

Al

Seadi,

T.,

Oleskowicz-Popiel,

P.,

2009.

The

future

of

anaerobic

digestion

and

biogas

utilization.

Bioresour.

Technol.

100,

5478–5484.

Kirchmann,

H.,

Lundvall,

A.,

1993.

Relationship

between

N

immobilization

and

volatile

fatty

acids

in

soil

after

application

of

pig

and

cattle

slurry.

Biol.

Fertil.

Soils

15,

161–164.

Mertens,

D.R.,

2002.

Gravimetric

determination

of

amylase-treated

neutral

detergent

fiber

in

feeds

using

refluxing

in

beakers

or

crucibles:

collaborative

study.

J.

AOAC

Int.

85,

1217–1240.

Möller,

K.,

Müller,

T.,

2012.

Effects

of

anaerobic

digestion

on

digestate

nutrient

availability

and

crop

growth:

a

review.

Eng.

Life

Sci.

12,

242–257.

Møller,

H.B.,

Lund,

I.,

Sommer,

S.G.,

2000.

Solid–liquid

separation

of

livestock

slurry:

efficiency

and

cost.

Bioresour.

Technol.

74,

223–229.

Möller,

K.,

Stinner,

W.,

Deuker,

A.,

Leithold,

G.,

2008.

Effects

of

different

manuring

systems

with

and

without

biogas

digestion

on

nitrogen

cycle

and

crop

yield

in

mixed

organic

dairy

farming

systems.

Nutr.

Cycl.

Agroecosyst.

82,

209–232.

Morvan,

T.,

Nicolardot,

B.,

2009.

Role

of

organic

fractions

on

C

decomposition

and

N

mineralization

of

animal

waste

in

soil.

Biol.

Fertil.

Soils

45,

477–486.

Morvan,

T.,

Nicolardot,

B.,

Péan,

L.,

2006.

Biochemical

composition

and

kinetics

of

C

and

N

mineralization

of

animal

wastes:

a

typological

approach.

Biol.

Fertil.

Soils

42,

513–522.

Mu ˜

noz,

G.R.,

Kelling,

K.A.,

Powell,

J.M.,

Speth,

P.E.,

2004.

Comparison

of

estimates

of

first-year

dairy

manure

nitrogen

availability

or

recovery

using

nitrogen-15

and

other

techniques.

J.

Environ.

Qual.

33,

719–727.

Nevens,

F.,

Reheul,

D.,

2005.

Agronomical

and

environmental

evaluation

of

a

long-term

experiment

with

cattle

slurry

and

supplemental

inorganic

N

applications

in

silage

maize.

Eur.

J.

Agron.

22,

349–361.

Peters,

K.,

Jensen,

L.S.,

2011.

Biochemical

characteristics

of

solid

fractions

from

animal

slurry

separation

and

their

effects

on

C

and

N

mineralization

in

soil.

Biol.

Fertil.

Soils

47,

447–455.

Plénet,

D.,

Lemaire,

G.,

1999.

Relationships

between

dynamics

of

nitrogen

uptake

and

dry

matter

accumulation

in

maize

crops:

determination

of

critical

N

concentration.

Plant

Soil

216,

65–82.

Reijs,

J.W.,

Sonneveld,

M.P.W.,

Sørensen,

P.,

Schils,

R.L.M.,

Groot,

J.C.J.,

Lantinga,

E.A.,

2007.

Effects

of

different

diets

on

utilization

of

nitrogen

from

cattle

slurry

applied

to

grassland

on

a

sandy

soil

in

The

Netherlands.

Agric.

Ecosyst.

Environ.

118,

65–79.

Ritchie,

S.W.,

Hanway,

J.J.,

Benson,

G.O.,

1996.

How

a

corn

plant

develops.

Spec.

Rep.

48.

Rev.

ed.

Iowa

State

Univ.

Coop.

Ext.

Serv.,

Ames.

Saunders,

O.E.,

Fortuna,

A.,

Harrison,

J.H.,

Whitefield,

E.,

Cogger,

C.G.,

Kennedy,

A.C.,

Bary,

A.I.,

2012.

Comparison

of

raw

dairy

manure

slurry

and

anaerobically

digested

slurry

as

N

sources

for

grass

forage

production.

Int.

J.

Agron.

2012,

1–10.

Schröder,

J.J.,

2005.

Revisiting

the

agronomic

benefits

of

manure:

a

correct

assessment

and

exploitation

of

its

fertilizer

value

spares

the

environment.

Bioresour.

Technol.

96,

253–261.

Schröder,

J.J.,

Jansen,

A.G.,

Hilhorst,

G.J.,

2005.

Long-term

nitrogen

supply

from

cattle

slurry.

Soil

Use

Manag.

21,

196–204.

Schröder,

J.J.,

Uenk,

D.,

Hilhorst,

G.J.,

2007.

Long-term

nitrogen

fertilizer

replacement

value

of

cattle

manures

applied

to

cut

grassland.

Plant

Soil

299,

83–99.

Schröder,

J.J.,

de

Visser,

W.,

Assinck,

F.B.T.,

Velthof,

G.L.,

2013.

Effects

of

short-term

nitrogen

supply

from

livestock

manures

and

cover

crops

on

silage

maize

production

and

nitrate

leaching.

Soil

Use

Manag.

29,

151–160.

Sieling,

K.,

Herrmann,

A.,

Wienforth,

B.,

Taube,

F.,

Ohl,

S.,

Hartung,

E.,

Kage,

H.,

2013.

Biogas

cropping

systems:

short

term

response

of

yield

performance

and

N

use

efficiency

to

biogas

residue

application.

Eur.

J.

Agron.

47,

44–54.

Sommer,

S.G.,

Hutchings,

N.J.,

2001.

Ammonia

emission

from

field

applied

manure

and

its

reduction-invited

paper.

Eur.

J.

Agron.

15,

1–15.

Sørensen,

P.,

1998.

Carbon

mineralization,

nitrogen

immobilization

and

pH

change

in

soil

after

adding

volatile

fatty

acids.

Eur.

J.

Soil

Sci.

49,

457–462.

Sørensen,

P.,

2004.

Immobilisation,

remineralisation

and

residual

effects

in

subsequent

crops

of

dairy

cattle

slurry

nitrogen

compared

to

mineral

fertiliser

nitrogen.

Plant

Soil

267,

285–296.

Sørensen,

P.,

Weisbjerg,

M.R.,

Lund,

P.,

2003.

Dietary

effects

on

the

composition

and

plant

utilization

of

nitrogen

in

dairy

cattle

manure.

J.

Agric.

Sci.

141,

79–91.

Van

Kessel,

J.S.,

Reeves

III,

J.B.,

2002.

Nitrogen

mineralization

potential

of

dairy

manures

and

its

relationship

to

composition.

Biol.

Fertil.

Soils

36,

118–123.

Van

Kessel,

J.S.,

Reeves

III,

J.B.,

Meisinger,

J.J.,

2000.

Nitrogen

and

carbon

mineralization

of

potential

manure

components.

J.

Environ.

Qual.

29,

1669–1677.

Van

Soest,

P.J.,

1963.

Use

of

detergents

in

the

analysis

of

fibrous

feeds:

II.

a

rapid

method

for

the

determination

of

fiber

and

lignin.

J.

AOAC

Int.

46,

829–835.

Van

Soest,

P.J.,

Robertson,

J.B.,

Lewis,

B.A.,

1991.

Methods

of

dietary

fiber,

neutral

detergent

fiber

and

non-polysaccharides

in

relation

to

animal

nutrition.

J.

Dairy

Sci.

74,

3583–3597.

Webb,

J.,

Sørensen,

P.,

Velthof,

G.,

Amon,

B.,

Pinto,

M.,

Rodhe,

L.,

Salomon,

E.,

Hutchings,

N.,

Burczyk,

P.,

Reid,

J.,

2013.

An

assessment

of

the

variation

of

manure

nitrogen

efficiency

throughout

Europe

and

an

appraisal

of

means

to

increase

manure-N

efficiency.

Adv.

Agron.

119,

371–442.

Zavattaro,

L.,

Monaco,

S.,

Sacco,

D.,

Grignani,

C.,

2012.

Options

to

reduce

N

loss

from

maize

in

intensive

cropping

systems

in

Northern

Italy.

Agric.

Ecosyst.

Environ.

147,

24–35.


Document Outline


Wyszukiwarka

Podobne podstrony:
Koszty wytworzenia i wartość nawozowa pofermentu z różnych instalacji Belgia 2014
Poferment jako sybstytut mocznika Włochy 2016
Właściwości nawozowe i skład chemiczny różnych rodzajów pofermentu i kompostu Włochy 2010
9 Wartość nawozowa
Pomiot ptasi i słoma właściwości, sposoby stosowania,wartość nawozowa
Potencjał nawozowy pofermentu z pozostałości z farmy i przemysłu agro Hiszpania 2012
Energy and CO2 analysis of poplar and maize crops for biomass production in Italy Włochy 2016
Sterylizacja pofermentu Peletyzacja Włochy 2015
A Kowalczyk Jusko Nawozowe wykorzystanie pozostalosci pofermentacyjnych
Badania separacji na frakcje stałą i ciekłą gnojowicy i pulpy pofermentacyjnej Polska 2014
7 Znakowanie wartoscia odzywcza GDA 1
Tworzenie Łańcucha Wartości Dodanej
SPORY O WARTOSCI I CELE WYCHOWANIA (3)
Mobilność i straty składników nawozowych
Aksjologia Geneza, wartości, cechy, podział
14 Systemu wartosci w nauce

więcej podobnych podstron