Comparison of Raw Dairy Manure Slurry and Anaerobically Digested Slurry as N Sources for Grass Forage Production
We conducted a 3-year field study to determine how raw dairy slurry and anaerobically digested slurry (dairy slurry and food waste) applied via broadcast and subsurface deposition to reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) affected forage biomass, N uptake, apparent nitrogen recovery (ANR), and soil...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2012-01-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of Agronomy |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/101074 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1832563924821606400 |
|---|---|
| author | Olivia E. Saunders Ann-Marie Fortuna Joe H. Harrison Elizabeth Whitefield Craig G. Cogger Ann C. Kennedy Andy I. Bary |
| author_facet | Olivia E. Saunders Ann-Marie Fortuna Joe H. Harrison Elizabeth Whitefield Craig G. Cogger Ann C. Kennedy Andy I. Bary |
| author_sort | Olivia E. Saunders |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | We conducted a 3-year field study to determine how raw dairy slurry and anaerobically digested slurry (dairy slurry and food waste) applied via broadcast and subsurface deposition to reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) affected forage biomass, N uptake, apparent nitrogen recovery (ANR), and soil nitrate concentrations relative to urea. Annual N applications ranged from 600 kg N ha−1 in 2009 to 300 g N ha−1 in 2011. Forage yield and N uptake were similar across slurry treatments. Soil nitrate concentrations were greatest at the beginning of the fall leaching season, and did not differ among slurry treatments or application methods. Urea-fertilized plots had the highest soil nitrate concentrations but did not consistently have greatest forage biomass. ANR for the slurry treatments ranged from 35 to 70% when calculations were based on ammonium-N concentration, compared with 31 to 65% for urea. Slurry ANR calculated on a total N basis was lower (15 to 40%) due to lower availability of the organic N in the slurries. No consistent differences in soil microbial biomass or other biological indicators were observed. Anaerobically digested slurry supported equal forage production and similar N use efficiency when compared to raw dairy slurry. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-8086d398ebca47adb9d393bc708cd8f9 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1687-8159 1687-8167 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2012-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | International Journal of Agronomy |
| spelling | doaj-art-8086d398ebca47adb9d393bc708cd8f92025-02-03T01:12:11ZengWileyInternational Journal of Agronomy1687-81591687-81672012-01-01201210.1155/2012/101074101074Comparison of Raw Dairy Manure Slurry and Anaerobically Digested Slurry as N Sources for Grass Forage ProductionOlivia E. Saunders0Ann-Marie Fortuna1Joe H. Harrison2Elizabeth Whitefield3Craig G. Cogger4Ann C. Kennedy5Andy I. Bary6Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USADepartment of Crop and Soil Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USADepartment of Animal Sciences, Washington State University, Puyallup, WA 98371, USADepartment of Animal Sciences, Washington State University, Puyallup, WA 98371, USADepartment of Crop and Soil Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USALand Management and Water Conservation Research Unit, USDA-ARS, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USADepartment of Crop and Soil Sciences, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USAWe conducted a 3-year field study to determine how raw dairy slurry and anaerobically digested slurry (dairy slurry and food waste) applied via broadcast and subsurface deposition to reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea) affected forage biomass, N uptake, apparent nitrogen recovery (ANR), and soil nitrate concentrations relative to urea. Annual N applications ranged from 600 kg N ha−1 in 2009 to 300 g N ha−1 in 2011. Forage yield and N uptake were similar across slurry treatments. Soil nitrate concentrations were greatest at the beginning of the fall leaching season, and did not differ among slurry treatments or application methods. Urea-fertilized plots had the highest soil nitrate concentrations but did not consistently have greatest forage biomass. ANR for the slurry treatments ranged from 35 to 70% when calculations were based on ammonium-N concentration, compared with 31 to 65% for urea. Slurry ANR calculated on a total N basis was lower (15 to 40%) due to lower availability of the organic N in the slurries. No consistent differences in soil microbial biomass or other biological indicators were observed. Anaerobically digested slurry supported equal forage production and similar N use efficiency when compared to raw dairy slurry.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/101074 |
| spellingShingle | Olivia E. Saunders Ann-Marie Fortuna Joe H. Harrison Elizabeth Whitefield Craig G. Cogger Ann C. Kennedy Andy I. Bary Comparison of Raw Dairy Manure Slurry and Anaerobically Digested Slurry as N Sources for Grass Forage Production International Journal of Agronomy |
| title | Comparison of Raw Dairy Manure Slurry and Anaerobically Digested Slurry as N Sources for Grass Forage Production |
| title_full | Comparison of Raw Dairy Manure Slurry and Anaerobically Digested Slurry as N Sources for Grass Forage Production |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of Raw Dairy Manure Slurry and Anaerobically Digested Slurry as N Sources for Grass Forage Production |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Raw Dairy Manure Slurry and Anaerobically Digested Slurry as N Sources for Grass Forage Production |
| title_short | Comparison of Raw Dairy Manure Slurry and Anaerobically Digested Slurry as N Sources for Grass Forage Production |
| title_sort | comparison of raw dairy manure slurry and anaerobically digested slurry as n sources for grass forage production |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2012/101074 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT oliviaesaunders comparisonofrawdairymanureslurryandanaerobicallydigestedslurryasnsourcesforgrassforageproduction AT annmariefortuna comparisonofrawdairymanureslurryandanaerobicallydigestedslurryasnsourcesforgrassforageproduction AT joehharrison comparisonofrawdairymanureslurryandanaerobicallydigestedslurryasnsourcesforgrassforageproduction AT elizabethwhitefield comparisonofrawdairymanureslurryandanaerobicallydigestedslurryasnsourcesforgrassforageproduction AT craiggcogger comparisonofrawdairymanureslurryandanaerobicallydigestedslurryasnsourcesforgrassforageproduction AT annckennedy comparisonofrawdairymanureslurryandanaerobicallydigestedslurryasnsourcesforgrassforageproduction AT andyibary comparisonofrawdairymanureslurryandanaerobicallydigestedslurryasnsourcesforgrassforageproduction |