Printer Friendly

Effects of different manure application rates on soil properties, nutrient use, and crop yield during dryland maize farming.

Introduction

Problems associated with conventional agricultural management (i.e. frequent conventional tillage and excessive inorganic fertiliser application) have led to land degradation, soil organic matter loss, and structure deterioration, which affect air quality, water quality, and nutrient flow and, ultimately, crop growth (Golchin et al. 1995). Organic farming is increasingly popular because of perceived health and environmental benefits, especially in arid areas (Zhao et al. 2009). Therefore, effective fertiliser application management must be a major consideration for improving environmental health and ensuring sustainable development. Manure application is an important organic farming management practice for improving soil quality (Shiralipour et al. 1992; Carpenter-Boggs et al. 2000).

The effects of manure on crop yield and growth have been reported as similar to, or less than, those of inorganic fertilisers, although the effects are dependent on the amounts of manure or nitrogen (N) applied (Randall et al. 2000; Griffin et al. 2002). In general, the crop availability of N from manure is less than from inorganic fertilisers (Beauchamp 1983; Jokela 1992). However, the application of manure to soils can improve their chemical and physical properties (Randall et al. 2000; Eghball 2002; Butler and Muir 2006), thereby increasing crop yields, plant nutrient concentrations, and nutrient uptake (Griffin et al. 2002; Butler and Muir 2006). Manure is also highly effective for maintaining the soil nutrient equilibrium and improving its fertility status (Mohammadi et al. 201 la). However, inappropriate use of manure may have serious effects on the soil environment, including soil degradation, organic matter loss, and soil and water contamination. Edmeades (2003) found that N and phosphorus (P) leaching occurred when manure application rate exceeded nutrient uptake by crops. Therefore, balanced application of manure can improve the soil structure and enhance soil quality, and it may be a highly effective method for promoting the stable and sustainable development of agriculture.

The 14-year field trials conducted by Edmeades (2003) found no significant difference between crops produced with chemical fertilisers or manures when the N levels were equivalent. Manure and chemical fertiliser have advantages and disadvantages, but the application of a combination of chemical fertiliser and manure is now a major research focus. Thus, the present study investigated the effects of different application rates of manure combined with conventional chemical fertiliser on soil properties, nutrient use, and crop yield in the Weibei Highlands of China. We aimed to provide a scientific basis for improvement of soil fertility.

Materials and methods

Site description

A 4-year field experiment was conducted with maize (Zea mays L.) between 2007 and 2010 at the Ganjing Research Station of North-west A&F University, Heyang, Shaanxi, China (35[degrees]24'N, 110[degrees]17'E; 850m altitude). The mean annual temperature was 9-10[degrees]C. The experimental site was characterised by low and erratic rainfall with droughts occurring at different stages of maize growth. The long-term mean annual rainfall at the site was 571.9mm, and the mean annual evaporation was 1832.8 mm. Most of the rainfall occurred from July to September. During 2007-2010, the rainfall during the maize growth period was 398.3, 350.8, 379.1, and 390.7mm in each year, respectively.

The experimental field was flat according to the FAO/UNESCO Soil Classification (FAO/UNESCO 1993), and the soil was a dark loessial soil with 26.8% sand, 41.9% silt, and 21.3% clay. An analysis of soil samples taken from the same experimental area in October 2006 showed that the top 20 cm of soil had the following characteristics: ph 8.1, soil organic carbon 8.3 g/kg, total N 0.8 g/kg, total P 0.5 g/kg, total potassium (K) 8.4 g/kg, available N 46.5 mg/kg, available P 9.0 mg/kg, and available K 106.2 mg/kg.

Experimental design

The experiment was designed as a randomised block with three replicates. Each plot was 4 m wide and 6 m long. Five treatments were initiated in 2007: (i) no fertiliser application (NF); (ii) application of chemical fertilisers only (CF-only); (iii) application of manure at a low rate of 7500kg/ha in combination with chemical fertilisers (LM); (iv) application of manure at a medium rate of 15 000 kg/ha in combination with chemical fertilisers (MM); (v) application of manure at a high rate of 22500kg/ha in combination with chemical fertilisers (HM).

Fertiliser and crop management

The N and P rates of the chemical fertilisers were 255 and 90 kg/ha, respectively. Fresh chicken manure was used, which contained (g/kg): organic matter 579.6, N 12.6, P 6.4, and K 13.4. The manure was applied to the soil ~6 months before the maize was planted, to facilitate decomposition of the manure. Thus, the manure was applied in October 2006 and after maize harvesting at the end of September during 2007-2009. Chemical fertilisers were applied separately at rates of 102 kg N and 90 kg P/ha before sowing the maize. Nitrogen fertiliser was applied again at a rate of 153 kg/ha at the stage of development when maize formed spear-shaped tops (late July). The nutrient contents of the manures and chemical fertilisers used for different treatments are shown in Table 1.

In each experimental year, maize (cv. Shendan 16) was planted at a rate of 49500plants/ha in mid-April and harvested in mid-September. No irrigation was provided in any of the experimental years. Manual weeding was performed as required throughout the experiment.

Sampling and analysis

Soil samples were collected from the surface layers (0-20 cm) of ail plots immediately after maize harvest (i.e. before manure application) in September each year. Soil samples were collected from four points in each plot replicate and mixed to produce a composite sample. Approximately 500 g of soil was subsampled from the mixed composite sample by quartering. Approximately 200g of this soil subsample was then used for aggregate analysis, while the remainder was sieved, mixed, and stored immediately at 4[degrees]C, before analysing its enzymatic activity.

The enzyme activity values were calculated based on the oven-dried (105[degrees]C) weight of the soil. Urease and alkaline phosphatase activities were determined according to the method of Tabatabai (1994). Invertase activity was determined by colourimetric analysis using 3,5-dinitrosalicylic acid (Guan et al. 1986).

The size distribution of water-stable aggregates was estimated by the wet sieving method (Yoder 1936), using a set of sieves with mesh sizes of 5, 2, 1,0.5, and 0.25 mm. Briefly, aggregates of 5-8 mm size were separated initially from the bulk soil by dry sieving. Approximately 50 g of this aggregate size class was then placed in the first sieve of the set, and it was gently moistened from below to avoid the sudden rupture of aggregates. After soaking the soil for 10 min, the set was shaken in water for 10 min at 30 oscillations/min. The percentage weight of water-stable aggregates retained on sieves that measured >0.25 mm in diameter was expressed as the >0.25-mm water-stable aggregates.

Three random soil samples were collected from each plot replicate using a 54-mm-diameter steel core-sampling tube that was manually driven down to a depth of 20 cm. Soil cores were weighed wet, dried at 105[degrees]C for 48 h, and weighed again to determine the bulk density (Ferraro and Ghersa 2007).

The grain yield and biomass yield were determined by manually harvesting three 3-m row lengths, which were selected randomly from each plot. Three representative plants with uniform growth were also selected, and separate samples of their roots, stalks, leaves, and ears/cobs were collected, oven-dried at 80[degrees]C for 72 h, and then weighed. The total N concentration in maize plants was determined by Kjeldahl digestion (Olsen and Sommers 1982). The total N content (g/kg) of the crop was multiplied by the biomass (kg/ha) to determine the N uptake (kg/ha). Residual N (kg/ha) was calculated by subtracting the total N uptake of maize plants from the N fertiliser application rate.

Statistical analysis

Data for each year were tested for differences by the analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedure using SAS 6.2 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). Duncan's new multiple range test was performed to separate mean values if the F-test indicated statistical significance at the P = 0.05 level.

Results

Soil bulk density

Soil bulk density was not statistically different among treatments during the first two experimental years (Fig. 1). The HM treatment significantly (P<0.05) decreased the soil bulk density after the third year, and reduced it by 4.8% and 5.6% in 2009 and 2010, respectively, compared with the NF treatment, and reduced it by 4.8% compared with the CF-only treatment in 2010. The MM and LM treatments resulted in a slightly lower bulk soil density than NF and CF-only, although the differences were not significant.

Water-stable aggregates >0.25 mm

As shown in Fig. 2, the manure combined with chemical fertiliser treatments significantly increased the >0.25-mm water-stable aggregate content, and the content was higher with increasing manure application rates. Compared with NF, HM increased the >0.25-mm water-stable aggregate content by 28.9-57.6%, MM increased it by 16.7-35.9%, and LM increased it by 8.5-20.0% during 2007-2010. HM and MM also significantly increased the soil >0.25-mm water-stable aggregate content compared with CF-only during 20072010, i.e. HM by 20.3-43.3% and MM by 8.9-23.5%. The >0.25-mm water-stable aggregate content was not different between LM and CF-only during 2007-10, whereas MM increased the content by 9.1% compared with CF-only during 2010. During the experimental period, HM increased the content by 18.8-35.6% compared with LM and by 10.5-19.9% compared with MM, while MM increased it by 6.7-16.4% compared with LM.

Soil organic matter

Soil organic matter is highly beneficial for the chemical, biological, and physical properties of soils, thereby affecting the potential yield of soils. The effect of manure on soil organic matter is shown in Fig. 3, where the soil organic matter content increased with the amount of manure applied. The soil organic matter content of LM was slightly higher than NF and CF-only, although the difference was significant in 2010 only. The soil organic matter content of MM was significantly higher than NF and CF-only in 20092010, i.e. 5.2-7.7% and 4.6-6.0%, respectively. Compared with the CF-only and NF treatments, HM significantly increased the soil organic matter content by 5.1-11.2% and 4.5-9.5%, respectively, in 2007-2010. There was a significant difference between MM and HM for each of the four experimental years.

Soil enzyme activities

The manure treatments had higher soil urease, alkaline phosphatase, and invertase activities than the NF and CF-only treatments, and soil enzyme activities increased with the amount of manure applied (Fig. 4). Soil urease, alkaline phosphatase, and invertase activities were always highest with HM throughout the four experimental years, i.e. the enzyme activities increased by 9.4-20.0%, 17.4-0.0%, and 5.9-13.2%, respectively, compared with NF, and by 8.2-17.1%, 15.7-33.8%, and 5.2-11.5% compared with CF-only. Compared with NF and CF-only, respectively, MM treatments significantly increased soil urease activity by 8.8-14.0% and 6.9-12.1% in 2008-2010, soil alkaline phosphatase activity by 8.7-29.2% and 7.1-23.5% in 2007-2010, and soil invertase activity by 7.37-11.17% and 6.18-9.43% in 2009-2010. Compared with NF and CF-only, respectively, the LM treatment significantly increased soil urease activity by 7.7-11.6% and 5.7-8.9% in 2009-2010, soil alkaline phosphatase activity by 9.0-18.5% and 5.8-13.2% in 2008-2010, and soil invertase activity by 7.7% and 6.0% in 2010 only. There were no significant differences between CF-only and NF throughout the four experimental years.

Grain yield and biomass

Application of organic manure significantly increased maize yield and biomass. The grain yield and biomass of stalks and leaves increased with manure application rate, whereas the biomass of cobs and roots varied in different years (Table 2). Compared with NF, CF-only significantly increased the grain yield by 15.4-18.1% in 2007-2010. There were no significant differences in the biomass of stalks and leaves, cobs, and roots with CF-only and NF during 2007-2008, whereas biomass was significantly higher with CF-only than with NF in 2009-2010, for stalks and leaves by 13.9-16.5%, cobs by 6.9 11.4%, and roots by 3.7-14.5%. During 2007-2010, LM significantly increased the grain yield and biomass of stalks and leaves, cobs, and roots by 83.9-96.3%, 49.6-87.0%, 26.2-98.1%, and 28.4-145.2%, respectively, compared with NF, and by 59.2-66.7%, 37.4-60.6%, 18.0-57.7%, 23.9-94.9%, respectively, compared with CF-only. Treatment MM significantly increased the grain yield and the biomass of stalks and leaves, cobs, and roots by 118.5-135.7%, 61.6-105.0%, 29.9-103.3%, and 33.9-128.4%, respectively, compared with CF-only. In the experimental years when the biomass increased, there was little difference between the MM and HM treatments. The grain yield and biomass with MM were significantly higher than those with HM during 2010.

Nitrogen uptake

Table 3 shows that the total N concentration in maize grain, stalks and leaves, cobs, and roots was significantly influenced by the manure rate during the study period. The total N concentration varied among the experimental years but increased with the manure rate. Compared with NF, CF-only significantly increased the N concentration of grain and of stalks and leaves by 1.6-3.9% and 10.8-24.6%, respectively, whereas there were no significant differences in maize cob and root N uptake with CF-only and NF.

Treatment LM increased the N concentration of grain, stalks and leaves, and cobs by 5.5-14.2%, 4.8-26.2%, and 11.8-15.9%, respectively, compared with NF, whereas there were no significant differences in the N concentration of roots with LM and NF. Compared with CF-only, LM increased the N concentration of grain, stalks and leaves, cobs, and roots by 3.0-9.9%, 1.3-8.2%, 3.6-13.5%, and 6.5-13.1%, respectively, while MM increased them by 15.8-18.6%, 3.9-24.7%, 36-32.6% and 7.5-18.5%, respectively. Treatment HM produced slightly higher N concentrations than MM, but there were no significant differences.

Table 4 shows that N uptake with manure treatments was significantly higher than with the CF-only treatment during 2007-2010. The N uptake with CF-only was 116.1-138.3 kg/ ha during the 4-year study; LM, MM, and HM increased N uptake by 78.2 95.4, 179.3 189.8, and 172.0-242.9kg/ha, respectively, compared with CF-only. The residual N level in the soil with the HM treatment was significant higher than with CF-only, LM, and MM treatments during the study period, although there were no significant differences between CF-only, LM, and MM in 2008-2010.

Discussion

Soil organic matter content is dynamic and it responds effectively to changes in soil management, tillage, and plant production (Baker et al. 2007). This is important for renewing the 'nutrient fund,' improving the soil structure, maintaining a good tilth, and minimising erosion (Mohammadi et al. 2011a). Manure is an organic source of nutrients which increases the soil organic matter and enhances soil quality. In the current study, the continuous application of manure significantly increased soil organic matter content, which increased with the amount of manure applied. This was because the decomposed manure contained an abundance of relatively stable organic carbon, which readily accumulated in the soil and significantly affected the soil organic matter content (Wu et al. 2005).

Soil aggregation and soil organic matter are closely linked (Caravaca et al. 2002). An increase in the soil organic matter leads to an improvement in the nutrient status of the soil, increased microbial activity, and increased cohesion and better aggregate stability (Oades and Waters 1991; Spaccini et al. 2004; Sullivan 1990). The improved aggregate stability would result in better protection against erosion of soil after manure treatments (Bronick and Lal 2005; Ferreras et al. 2006; Hati et al. 2007). The current study found a strongly significant, positive correlation between organic matter content and the >0.25-mm water-stable aggregate content. The organic manure treatments significantly increased the >0.25-mm water-stable aggregate content, which increased with the increasing level of manure application. This result agreed with that reported by Benbi et al. (1998). Rose (1991) showed that manure could increase the soil organic matter content, enhance soil porosity, and decrease soil bulk density. In the current experiment, the bulk density was significantly lower with the HM treatment than the NF treatment after the third year, and it was also lower than the CF-only treatment after the fourth year. This improvement was attributable to the combination of manure and chemical fertiliser, which increased the organic matter content of the soil and improved soil aggregate structure (Tiarks and Chesnin 1974; Schjonning et al. 1994), thereby leading to a higher micropore volume, increased root growth, and a lower soil bulk density.

Soil enzyme activities can react more rapidly than other variables to changes in soil management, which means enzyme activities may be useful early indicators of biological changes (Bandick and Dick 1999; Masciandaro et al. 2004). Related studies have shown that the long-term application of manure improves the physical and chemical properties of soil (Zaller and Kopke 2004; Kihanda et al. 2006) if it provides a suitable environment for microbial growth (Goyal et al. 1993), thereby enhancing soil enzyme activities. In our experiment, we found that the soil urease, alkaline phosphatase, and invertase activities were higher with the manure treatments than with the NF and CF. treatments. These results agreed with those reported by Mohammadi et al. (201 lb). We also found that the number of years with increasing soil enzyme activity levels was increased with manure treatments. This may be due to the cumulative effect of organic matter build-up after manure application each year (Kihanda et al. 2006).

Many studies have reported that the combined application of chemical fertiliser and manure has a major effect on the N, P, and K contents of corn plants (Evans et al. 1977; Sutton et al. 1986). Culley et al. (1981) and Motavalli et al. (1989) reported that the addition of liquid manure increased the N, P, and K uptakes of corn plants in a similar manner to the recommended inorganic fertiliser. We showed that manure treatments could increase maize grain yield and biomass yield, while they also significantly increased the total N concentration in maize grain, stalks and leaves, cobs, and roots compared with CF-only. Our results were consistent with Li et al. (2008), who found that an organic-inorganic compound fertiliser increased maize grain yield and biomass yield, and Kato (2012) who found that the N content of grain with manure treatments was significantly higher than with conventional fertiliser and a low-level manure treatment.

Song and Fan (2004) reported that organic fertiliser could support the consolidation of soil N due to soil microbial activities, and it reduced volatile ammonia, thereby enhancing N-utilisation efficiency. Other studies have shown that low levels of residual N in the soil can provide an N source for the next crop, whereas high levels of residual N constitute a serious waste of resources and a source of environmental pollution (Deigdao 1994; Menelik 1994). We found that the N uptake levels with the HM, MM, and LM treatments were significantly higher than with the CF-only and NF treatments. The residual N levels in the soil after crop harvest with the MM and LM treatments were slightly higher than with the CF-only treatment, although the differences were not significant. However, the residual N level in the soil with the HM treatment was significant higher than with the CF-only, LM, and MM treatments, because the HM treatment did not increase the yield accordingly.

Conclusions

Combined application of manure and chemical fertiliser can improve the soil structure and increase the soil organic matter content and enzyme activities, and these effects were much more evident with increasing rates of manure application. Manure combined with chemical fertiliser also significantly increased the crop biomass and total N concentration in the plant organs, thereby improving the N fertiliser utilisation. However, when the increase in crop yield did not offset the high fertiliser rate, a superabundance of N accumulated in the soil, readily causing environmental pollution. From the perspective of soil environment conservation, the medium manure application (15000kg/ha) in combination with chemical fertiliser (i.e. MM) could improve the soil properties and increase crop yield, but with no significant increase in the residual N level compared with the low application of manure (LM) and chemical fertiliser (CF-only). Therefore, the medium manure application is the most appropriate soil fertiliser rate for dryland maize production.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/SR11339

Received 13 September 2011, accepted 21 July 2012, published online 25 September 2012

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the financial support provided by the 'Eleventh Five-Year' Plan of the People's Republic of China (Grant No. 2006BAD29B03), the 'Twelfth Five-Year' Science and Technology Support Plan of the People's Republic of China (Grant No. 201 IBAD29B09), the 'Twelfth Five-Year' 863 Plan of the People's Republic of China (Grant No. 2011NXC01-16), and the programs of Shaanxi Province (2010NKC-03, 2011NXC01-16). We thank Dr Duncan E. Jackson for improving the English language content of this manuscript.

References

Baker CJ, Saxton KE, Ritchie WR, Chamen WCT, Reicosky DC, Ribeiro F, Justice SE, Hobbs PR (2007) 'No-tillage seeding in conservation agriculture.' (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome)

Bandick A, Dick R (1999) Field management effects on soil enzyme activities. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 31, 1471-1479. doi:10.1016/S0038-0717(99)00051-6

Beauchamp EG (1983) Response of coin to nitrogen in preplant and sidedress applications of liquid dairy cattle manure. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 63, 377-386. doi:10.4141/cjss83-036

Benbi D, Biswas C, Bawa S, Kumar K (1998) Influence of farmyard manure, inorganic fertilizers and weed control practices on some soil physical properties in a long-term experiment. Soil Use and Management 14, 52 54. doi:10.1111/j.1475-2743.1998.tb00610.x

Bronick C, Lai R (2005) Soil structure and management: a review. Geoderma 124, 3 22. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2004.03.005

Butler T J, Muir JP (2006) Dairy manure compost improves soil and increases tall wheatgrass yield. Agronomy Journal 98, 1090-1096. doi: 10.2134/agronj2005.0348

Caravaca F, Masciandaro G, Ceccanti B (2002) Land use in relation to soil chemical and biochemical properties in a semiarid Mediterranean environment. Soil& Tillage Research 68, 23-30. doi:10.1016/S01671987(02)00080-6

Carpenter-Boggs L, Kennedy A, Reganold J (2000) Organic and biodynamic management: effects on soil biology. Soil Science Society of America Journal 64, 1651-1659. doi:10.2136/sssaj2000.6451651x

Culley JLB, Phillips PA, Hore FR, Patni NK (1981) Soil chemical properties and removal of nutrients by corn resulting from different rates and timing of liquid dairy manure applications. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 61, 39-46. doi:10.4141/cjss81-005

Deigdao R (1994) Soil mineral N and organic matter mineralization effect on maize response to N-fertilizer application on a millisol and uttisol in Venezuela. In '15th World Congress of Soil Science 5b'. pp. 341-351.

Edmeades DC (2003) The long-term effects of manures and fertilisers on soil productivity and quality: a review. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 66, 165-180. doi:10.1023/A:1023999816690

Eghball B (2002) Soil properties as influenced by phosphorus- and nitrogen-based manure and compost applications. Agronomy Journal 94, 128-135. doi:10.2134/agronj2002.0128

Evans SD, Goodrich PR, Munter RC, Smith RE (1977) Effects of solid and liquid beef manure and liquid hog manure on soil characteristics and on growth, yield, and composition of coin. Journal of Environmental Quality 6, 361-368. doi:10.2134/jeq1977.00472425000600040006x

FAO/UNESCO (1993) 'World soil resources. An explanatory note on the FAO World Soil Resource Map at 1:25,000,000 scales.' (FAO: Rome)

Ferraro DO, Ghersa CM (2007) Quantifying the crop management influence on arable soil condition in the Inland Pampa (Argentina). Geoderma 141, 43 52. doi:10.1016/j.geoderma.2007.04.025

Ferreras L, Gomez E, Toresani S, Firpo I, Rotondo R (2006) Effect of organic amendments on some physical, chemical and biological properties in a horticultural soil. Bioresource Technology 97, 635-640. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2005.03.018

Golchin A, Clarke P, Oades J, Skjemstad J (1995) The effects of cultivation on the composition of organic matter and structural stability of soils. Australian Journal of Soil Research 33, 975 993. doi:10.1071/SR9950975

Goyal S, Mishra M, Dhankar S, Kapoor K, Batra R (1993) Microbial biomass turnover and enzyme activities following the application of farmyard manure to field soils with and without previous long-term applications. Biology and Fertility of Soils 15, 60-64. doi:10.1007/BF00336290

Griffin T, Giberson E, Wiedenhoeft M (2002) Yield responses of long-term mixed grassland swards and nutrient cycling under different nutrient sources and management regimes. Grass and Forage Science 57, 268 278. doi: 10.1046/j. 1365-2494.2002.00325.x

Guan S, Zhang D, Zhang Z (1986) 'Soil enzymes and its methodology.' (Agricultural Press: Beijing) [in Chinese]

Hati K, Swarup A, Dwivedi A, Misra A, Bandyopadhyay K (2007) Changes in soil physical properties and organic carbon status at the topsoil horizon of a vertisol of central India after 28 years of continuous cropping, fertilization and manuring. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 119, 127 134. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2006.06.017

Jokela WE (1992) Nitrogen fertilizer and dairy manure effects on corn yield and soil nitrate. Soil Science Society of America Journal 56, 148-154. doi: 10.2136/sssaj 1992.03615995005600010023x

Kato Y (2012) Grain nitrogen concentration in wheat grown under intensive organic manure application on andosols in central Japan. Plant Production Science 15, 40-47. doi: 10.1626/pps. 15.40

Kihanda F, Warren G, Micheni A (2006) Effect of manure application on crop yield and soi1 chemical properties in a long-term field trial of semi-arid Kenya. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 76, 341-354.

Li GP, Zhou XB, Yuan L (2008) Effect of different fertilizer pattern on summer maize yield and NPK contents. Tillage and Cultivation 6, 13 15. [in Chinese]

Masciandaro G, Ceccanti B, Benedicto S, Lee H, Cook H (2004) Enzyme activity and C and N pools in soil following application of mulches. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 84, 19-30. doi: 10.4141/S03045

Menelik G (1994) Corn yield and nitrogen uptake as influenced by tillage and applied nitrogen. Journal of Plant Nutrition 17, 911-931. doi: 10.1080/ 01904169409364777

Mohammadi K, Heidari G, Khalesro S, Sohrabi Y (2011a) Soil management, microorganisms and organic matter interactions: A review. African Journal of Biotechnology 10, 19840-19849.

Mohammadi K, Ghalavand A, Aghaalikhani M, Heidari GR, Shahmoradi B, Sohrabi Y (2011b) Effect of different methods of crop rotation and fertilization on canola traits and soil microbial activity. Australian Journal of Crop Science 5, 44-52.

Motavalli PP, Kelling KA, Converse JC (1989) First-year nutrient availability from injected dairy manure. Journal of Environmental Quality 18, 180-185. doi:10.2134/jeq1989.00472425001800020009x

Oades JM, Waters AG (1991) Aggregate hierarchy in soils. Australian Journal of Soil Research 29, 815-828. doi:10.1071/SR9910815

Olsen SR, Sommers LE (1982) Phosphorous. In 'Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Chemical and microbiological properties'. 2nd edn. Agronomy Monograph No. 9. (Ed. AL Page) pp. 403-430. (Soil Science Society of America: Madison, WI)

Randall GW, Iragavarapu TK, Schmitt MA (2000) Nutrient losses in subsurface drainage water from dairy manure and urea applied for corn. Journal of Environmental Quality 29, 1244-1252. doi:10.2134/ jeq2000.0047242500290004003lx

Rose D (1991) The effect of long-continued organic manuring on some physical properties of soils. In 'Advances in soil organic matter research: the impact on agriculture and the environment'. (Ed. ED Wilson) pp. 197-205. (Redwood Press: Melksham, UK)

Schjonning P, Christensen B, Carstensen B (1994) Physical and chemical properties of a sandy loam receiving animal manure, mineral fertilizer or no fertilizer for 90 years. European Journal of Soil Science 45, 257-268. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2389.1994.tb00508.x

Shiralipour A, McConnell D, Smith W (1992) Physical and chemical properties of soils as affected by municipal solid waste compost application. Biomass and Bioenergy 3, 261-266. doi:10.1016/09619534(92)90030-T

Song YS, Fan XH (2004) Effect of combined application of organic and inorganic fertilizers on migration of nitrogen in rice soil of red earth. Journal of Jinggangshan College 12, 53-55. [Natural Sciences]

Spaccini R, Mbagwu J, Igwe C, Conte P, Piccolo A (2004) Carbohydrates and aggregation in lowland soils of Nigeria as influenced by organic inputs. Soil & Tillage Research 75, 161-172. doi: 10.1016/S0167-1987 (03)00158-2

Sullivan L (1990) Soil organic matter, air encapsulation and water-stable aggregation. Journal of Soil Science 41, 529-534. doi:10.1111/j.13652389.1990.tb00084.x

Sutton AL, Nelson DW, Kelly DT, Hill DL (1986) Comparison of solid vs. liquid dairy manure applications on corn yield and soil composition. Journal of Environmental Quality 15, 370-375. doi: 10.2134/jeq1986. 00472425001500040010x

Tabatabai M (1994) Soil enzymes. In 'Methods of soils analysis. Part 2. Microbiological and biochemical properties', pp. 778-833. (Soil Science Society of America: Madison, WI)

Tiarks A, Chesnin A (1974) Physical and chemical properties of soil associated with heavy applications of manure from cattle feedlots. Soil Science Society of America Journal 38, 826-830. doi:10.2136/sssaj 1974.03615995003800050036x

Wu QB, Wang XK, Guo R (2005) Soil organic carbon stability and influencing factors. Chinese Journal of Soil Science 36, 743-747. [in Chinese]

Yoder RE (1936) A direct method of aggregate analysis of soils and a study of the physical nature of erosion losses. Agronomy Journal 28, 337-351. doi: 10.2134/agronj 1936.00021962002800050001x

Zaller JG, Kopke U (2004) Effects of traditional and biodynamic farmyard manure amendment on yields, soil chemical, biochemical and biological properties in a long-term field experiment. Biology and Fertility of Soils 40, 222-229. doi: 10.1007/s00374-004-0772-0

Zhao Y, Wang P, Li J, Chen Y, Ying X, Liu S (2009) The effects of two organic manures on soil properties and crop yields on a temperate calcareous soil under a wheat-maize cropping systerm. European Journal of Agronomy 31, 36-42. doi:10.1016/j.eja.2009.03.001

Xianqing Hou (A,B) *, Xiaojuan Wang (A,B), *, Rong Li (A,B), Zhikuan Jia (A,B,D), Lianyou Liang (C), Junpeng Wang (A,B), Junfeng Nie (A,B), Xin Chen (A,B), and Zhen Wang (A,B)

(A) China Water-Saving Agricultural Academy in Arid Areas, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi, China.

(B) Key Laboratory of Crop Physi-ecology and Tillage Science in Northwestern loess Plateau, Ministry of Agriculture, Yangling, Shaanxi, China.

(C) College of Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi, China.

(D) Corresponding author. Email: zhikuan@tom.com

* X. J. Wang and X. Q. Hou contributed equally to this work.

Table 1. Nutrient content (kg-ha) of the manures and chemical
fertilisers under different fertilisers treatments

NF, No fertiliser; CF-only, chemical fertiliser-only; LM, low manure;
MM, medium manure; HM, high manure; OM, organic matter; N, total
nitrogen; P, phosphorus; K, potassium

Treatment           Manure         Fertiliser     Total nutrients

             OM     N    P    K    N   P   K     OM     N    P    K

NF           --    --   --   --   --   --  --    --    --   --   --
CF-only      --    --   --   --   255  90  --    --    255   90  --
LM           4347   94   48  101  255  90  --    4347  349  138  101
MM           8694  189   95  202  255  90  --    8694  444  185  202
HM         13 041  283  143  302  255  90  --  13 041  538  233  302

Table 2. Maize grain yield and biomass (kg/ha) of crop organs as a
function of the different fertiliser treatments during 2007-10

NF, No fertiliser; CF-only, chemical fertiliser-only; LM, low manure;
MM, medium manure; HM, high manure. Within columns, means followed by
the same letter are not significantly different at P=0.05

Year   Treatment   Grain    Stalk and leaf    Cob      Root

2007   NF           4107d       3745c         905b     495a
       CF-only      4741d       3775c        1137b     537a
       LM           7620c       5603b        1793a     896a
       MM          10457b       7739a        1882a     837a
       HM          12788a       8686a        1930a     724a

2008   NF           4944d       4591c        1413c     353b
       CF-only      5711d       4908c        1248c     444b
       LM           9091c       6926b        1905b     866a
       MM          12939b       8880a        2537a    1015a
       HM          14317a       9361a        2478a    1377a

2009   NF           4672c       5580c        1557a    1168b
       CF-only      5503c       6357c        1665a    1211b
       LM           9172b       8735b        1965a    1965a
       MM          12973a      10270a        2162a    1622ab
       HM          13153a      10469a        2416a     805b

2010   NF           5093c       3804c        1193b     516b
       CF-only      6017c       4430c        1329b     591b
       LM           9801b       7112b        1821ab    867ab
       MM          13147a       9075a        2327a    1047a
       HM          12634a       7721b        2106a     936a

Table 3. Nitrogen content (g/kg) of maize organ as a function of the
different fertiliser treatments during 2007-10

NF, No fertiliser; CF-only, chemical fertiliser-only; LM, low manure;
MM, medium manure; HM, high manure. Within columns, means followed by
the same letter are not significantly different at P=0.05

Year   Treatment   Grain   Stalk and leaf   Cob     Root

2007   NF          15.5c        7.4b        4.4b    4.6b
       CF-only     16.1c        8.5b        4.6b    4.6b
       LM          17.7b        9.2b        5.1ab   4.3b
       MM          19.0a       10.6a        6.1a    5.3a
       HM          19.5a       10.8a        6.2a    5.4a

2008   NF          12.8b        8.3b        5.1a    8.4a
       CF-only     13.3b        9.2b        5.5a    8.0a
       LM          13.7b        9.7ab       5.7a    8.2a
       MM          15.4a       10.2a        5.7a    8.6a
       HM          15.7a       10.0a        5.7a    8.7a

2009   NF          12.7b        8.3ab       5.2b    5.3b
       CF-only     12.9b        8.2ab       5.2b    5.4b
       LM          13.4b        8.7a        5.9a    6.1a
       MM          15.3a        9.3a        6.1a    6.4a
       HM          15.9a        9.3a        6.3a    6.4a

2010   NF          14.0b        6.1b        6.9a    6.1b
       CF-only     14.6b        7.6a        6.5a    6.1b
       LM          15.9b        7.7a        6.9a    6.9a
       MM          17.3a        7.9a        7.4a    6.9a
       HM          17.6a        7.9a        7.5a    7.0a

Table 4. Nitrogen uptake (kg-ha) by maize and the residual N (kg-ha)
calculated by difference for soil for each of the different
fertilisers treatments  during 2007-10

NF, No fertiliser; CF-only, chemical fertiliser-only; LM, low manure;
MM, medium manure; HM, high manure. Within columns, means followed by
the same  letter are not significantly different at P=0.05

Treatment             2007                       2008

            N uptake of   N residual   N uptake of   N residual
               maize       of soil        maize       of soil

CF-only       116.3d        138.7b       132.0c         123b
LM            199.4c        149.6b       209.7b        139.3b
MM            296.4b        147.6b       312.2b        131.8b
HM            359.0a        179.0a       344.1a        193.9a

Treatment             2009                       2010

            N uptake of   N residual   N uptake of   N residual
               maize       of soil        maize       of soil

CF-only       139.2c        115.8b       133.9c        121.1b
LM            223.4b        125.6b       229.1b        119.9b
MM            317.6a        126.4b       323.8a        120.2b
HM            326.9a        211.1a       305.7a        232.3a
COPYRIGHT 2012 CSIRO Publishing
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2012 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Hou, Xianqing; Wang, Xiaojuan; Li, Rong; Jia, Zhikuan; Liang, Lianyou; Wang, Junpeng; Nie, Junfeng;
Publication:Soil Research
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:9CHIN
Date:Sep 1, 2012
Words:5825
Previous Article:Effects of elevated [O.sub.3] on soil respiration in a winter wheat--soybean rotation cropland.
Next Article:Phosphorus loss and speciation in overland flow from a plantation horticulture catchment and in an adjoining waterway in Coastal Queensland,...
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters