Impacts of different pig slurry application methods on soil quality indicators in a maize-soybean cropping sequence in the Sub-humid Pampas of Argentina

IF 1.2 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
V. R. Pegoraro, C. Cazorla, O. Bachmeier, T. Baigorria, M. Boccolini, J. Ortiz, Claudio Lorenzón, S. Hang, M. Zubillaga
{"title":"Impacts of different pig slurry application methods on soil quality indicators in a maize-soybean cropping sequence in the Sub-humid Pampas of Argentina","authors":"V. R. Pegoraro, C. Cazorla, O. Bachmeier, T. Baigorria, M. Boccolini, J. Ortiz, Claudio Lorenzón, S. Hang, M. Zubillaga","doi":"10.30486/IJROWA.2020.674424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose In Argentina, pig slurry (PS) is spread in surface with N losses in ammonia form. Different methods to decrease these emissions are available, but there is poor information about their impacts on the soil-plant system. The objective of this study was to compare the effects of different PS application methods on the soil quality in a maize-soybean cropping sequence. Methods PS application methods were evaluated: acidified (AS), incorporated (IS), surface (SS), mineral fertilization (MF) and control (C). The experimental design was arranged in a randomized block with three replicates. Chemical parameters and microbiological parameters were determined. Also, grain yields and N uptake were measured. Results IS caused increases in anaerobic nitrogen and basal respiration of soil on soybean. Treatments with PS and/or FM showed lower values in pH than C in both crops, and higher electrical conductivity only in maize. SS treatment showed higher Pe on soybean, indicating a maintenance of the P levels with respect to those in MF and C. The concentration of NO3- increased with MF in both crops. In maize, MF presented similar concentrations to AS and SS. IS increased grain yields of maize by 16 %, whereas SS and AS increased yields of soybean by 112% and 79%, respectively, compared to C. Conclusions The different PS application methods had similar effects on most of the indicators of soil quality. In maize, IS and AS were more efficient in retaining N within the soil-plant system, whereas, in soybean, the SS led to higher yields.","PeriodicalId":14373,"journal":{"name":"International Journal Of Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal Of Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30486/IJROWA.2020.674424","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose In Argentina, pig slurry (PS) is spread in surface with N losses in ammonia form. Different methods to decrease these emissions are available, but there is poor information about their impacts on the soil-plant system. The objective of this study was to compare the effects of different PS application methods on the soil quality in a maize-soybean cropping sequence. Methods PS application methods were evaluated: acidified (AS), incorporated (IS), surface (SS), mineral fertilization (MF) and control (C). The experimental design was arranged in a randomized block with three replicates. Chemical parameters and microbiological parameters were determined. Also, grain yields and N uptake were measured. Results IS caused increases in anaerobic nitrogen and basal respiration of soil on soybean. Treatments with PS and/or FM showed lower values in pH than C in both crops, and higher electrical conductivity only in maize. SS treatment showed higher Pe on soybean, indicating a maintenance of the P levels with respect to those in MF and C. The concentration of NO3- increased with MF in both crops. In maize, MF presented similar concentrations to AS and SS. IS increased grain yields of maize by 16 %, whereas SS and AS increased yields of soybean by 112% and 79%, respectively, compared to C. Conclusions The different PS application methods had similar effects on most of the indicators of soil quality. In maize, IS and AS were more efficient in retaining N within the soil-plant system, whereas, in soybean, the SS led to higher yields.
不同猪浆施用方式对阿根廷半湿润潘帕斯草原玉米-大豆种植顺序土壤质量指标的影响
在阿根廷,猪浆(PS)以氨的形式散布在地表,氮损失。减少这些排放的不同方法是可用的,但是关于它们对土壤-植物系统的影响的信息很少。本研究的目的是比较不同磷肥施用方式对玉米-大豆连作土壤质量的影响。方法采用酸化法(AS)、掺入法(IS)、地表法(SS)、矿物肥法(MF)和对照法(C) 4种不同的施用方式。试验设计为随机区组,每组3个重复。测定了化学参数和微生物参数。测定了籽粒产量和氮素吸收量。结果IS使大豆土壤厌氧氮和基础呼吸增加。PS和/或FM处理两种作物的pH值均低于C,只有玉米的电导率较高。SS处理在大豆上显示出较高的磷含量,表明与MF和c处理相比,SS处理维持了磷水平。在玉米中,MF与AS和SS浓度相近,与c相比,IS可使玉米增产16%,SS和AS可使大豆增产112%和79%。结论不同施用方式对大部分土壤质量指标的影响相似。在玉米中,IS和AS在土壤-植物系统中更有效地保留氮,而在大豆中,SS导致更高的产量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
26.70%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture is an open access journal that publishes high-quality solicited and unsolicited articles, in all areas of Recycling of organic waste including: -Solid waste reuse in agriculture -Waste water reuse in agriculture -Utilization of organic wastes: composting -Ways to reduce, reuse and recycle organic waste -Social and economic impact of reduction, reuse and recycling of organic waste in agriculture -Methods to raise the public awareness of recycling and reuse of organic waste in agriculture -Organic waste utilization in animal and poultry nutrition -Urban food waste composting
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信