Login

Join for Free!
116901 members
table of contents table of contents

Biology Articles » Agriculture » Plant Nutrient Issues for Sustainable Land Application » Tables

Tables
- Plant Nutrient Issues for Sustainable Land Application

..................................................

Table 1. Alum effects on ammonia flux and poultry production.{dagger}

House
treatment

NH3 flux

Poultry
production

Feed
efficiency

  mg NH3 m–2 h–1 kg bird–1 kg kg–1
No alum 8.3 1.66 2.04
Alum

2.1

1.72

1.98

{dagger} All treatment effects are significant at the 0.05 probability level. Data from Moore et al. (2000).

 

..................................................

Table 2. The effect of crop rotation and manure application history on nitrate leaching and the economically optimum N rate.{dagger}

Crop rotation

Manure
application
history

NO3–N
leached{ddagger}

Economically
optimum
N rate

    kg N ha–1

Continuous corn no 20 140
Continuous corn yes 41 100
Continuous corn,
  alfalfa
no 34  53
Continuous corn,
  alfalfa

yes

56

 40

{dagger} Values represent the average over two years and two N rates. Data from Andraski et al. (2000).

{ddagger} The amount of N leached was calculated from estimated soil drainage based on water balance and the mean monthly soil water NO3–N concentrations.


..................................................

Table 3. The influence of injection on N2O fluxes (±SD) from land-applied cattle slurry.{dagger}

  Cumulative flux

Management

2 wk

9 wk

  mg N2O-N m–2

Control 0.2 ± 0.4 1.8 ± 1.8
Surface-applied 14 ± 8 26 ± 16
Injected

146 ± 59

328 ± 146

{dagger} Data from Flessa and Beese (2000).

..................................................

 

Table 4. The influence of alum amendments to poultry litter on dissolved reactive and total P concentrations in runoff from surface applications of litter to pasture.{dagger}

  Soluble P

Total P



Year 1

Year 2

Year 1

Year 2

  mg L–1

No alum 3.2 7.9 4.2 8.7
Alum-amended

1.1

2.0

1.5

2.4

{dagger} All treatment effects are significant at the 0.05 probability level. Data from Moore et al. (2000).


..................................................

Table 5. The effect of diet modification on swine manure composition.{dagger}

Diet{ddagger}

Total P

Dissolved
reactive P

Phytic
acid P

  g kg–1

Control 25.5a§ 11.9a 3.9a
PHY 21.2b 11.6a 2.0b
HAP 20.7b 10.8a 1.6b
PHY + HAP

15.2c

 7.9b

0.7b

{dagger} Data from Baxter et al. (2003).

{ddagger} All diets contained approximately the same total P content. PHY, phytase-amended; HAP, high-available-P corn.

§ Means with the same letter within a column are not significantly different at the 0.05 probability level.

..................................................

 

 


rating: 3.10 from 21 votes | updated on: 21 Jan 2007 | views: 10838 |

Rate article:







excellent!bad…