Hostname: page-component-669899f699-swprf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-05T17:26:07.010Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Evaluation of different pig slurry composts as fertilizer of horticultural crops: Effects on selected chemical and microbial properties

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 December 2007

Margarita Ros ,
Carlos García  and
Maria Teresa Hernandez
Margarita Ros*
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Water Conservation and Organic Waste Management, Centro de Edafología y Biología Aplicada del Segura (CEBAS-CSIC), PO Box 164, 30100 Espinardo, Murcia, Spain.
Carlos García
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Water Conservation and Organic Waste Management, Centro de Edafología y Biología Aplicada del Segura (CEBAS-CSIC), PO Box 164, 30100 Espinardo, Murcia, Spain.
Maria Teresa Hernandez
Affiliation:
Department of Soil and Water Conservation and Organic Waste Management, Centro de Edafología y Biología Aplicada del Segura (CEBAS-CSIC), PO Box 164, 30100 Espinardo, Murcia, Spain.
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The excessive use of mineral fertilizers affects soil quality, gives rise to environmental problems and consumes energy. In contrast, organic amendment may improve soil quality at the same time as providing nutrients to plant. The aim of the work was to study the effects on crop yield and soil microbial activity of the successive addition of mineral fertilizers and fresh pig slurry before each successive crop compared with one sole application of different pig slurry composts (solid fraction of a pig slurry (CSFPS) and fresh pig slurry plus wood shavings (1:1 v/v; CPS+WS) before planting the first crop. Compost-treated soils exhibited higher organic carbon content than inorganically fertilized soils, throughout the experimental period. However, N content in the former soils was lower than in the latter after the second crop. Nevertheless, yields obtained with repeated additions of fresh pig slurry or with a sole application of pig slurry composts were similar to those obtained with repeated mineral fertilization. After the horticultural crops, organically treated soils generally showed higher values of both microbial biomass and metabolic microbial activity (measured as basal respiration and dehydrogenase activity) than the soil receiving mineral fertilization. Subsequently, the organically amended soils showed higher protease, phosphatase and β-glucosidase activities than the inorganically fertilized soil and similar levels of urease activity. From this study it can be concluded that both fresh and composted pig slurry can be used as an alternative for mineral fertilizer in growing horticultural crops and maintaining soil quality.

Keywords

fresh pig slurrycompostmineral fertilizerscrop yieldenzyme activitiessoil quality
Type
Research Article
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 307 - 315
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 Pascual, J.A., García, C., and Hernández, T. 1999. Lasting microbiological and biochemical effects of the addition of municipal solid waste to an arid soil. Biology and Fertility of Soils 30:1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2 Lalande, R., Gagnon, B., Simard, R.R., and Côte, D. 2000. Soil microbial biomass and enzyme activity following liquid hog manure application in a long-term trial. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 80:263–269.Google Scholar
3 Amberger, A. 1990. Use of organic wastes as fertilizers and its environmental implications. In Merckx, R., Vereecken, H. and Vlassak, K. (eds). Fertilization and the Environment. Kluwer, London. p. 314–329.Google Scholar
4 Diéz, J.A., de la Torre, A.I., Cartagena, M.C., Carballo, M., Vallejo, A., and Muñoz, M.J. 2001. Evaluation of the application of pig slurry to an experimental crop using agronomic and ecotoxicological approaches. Journal of Environmental Quality 30:2165–2172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5 Miner, J.R., Humenik, F.J., and Overcash, M.R. 2000. Managing Livestock Wastes to Preserve Environmental Quality. Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa.Google Scholar
6 Westerman, P.W. and Bicudo, J.R. 2005. Management considerations for organic waste use in agriculture. Bioresource Technology 96:215–221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7 Garcia, C., Hernandez, F., and Costa, F. 1991. Change in carbon fractions during composting and maturation of organic wastes. Environmental Management 15:433–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 Ros, M., Garcia, C., and Hernandez, T. 2005. A full-scale study of treatment of pig slurry by composting: Kinetic changes in chemical and microbial properties. Waste Management 26:1108–1118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9 Ros, M., Hernandez, M.T., and Garcia, C. 2003. Soil microbial activity after restoration of a semiarid soil by organic amendments. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 35:463–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10 Wardle, D.A. 1999. Biodiversity, ecosystems and interactions that transcend the interface. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 14:125–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11 Kandeler, E., Tscherko, D., and Spiegel, H. 1999. Long-term monitoring of microbial biomass, N mineralization and enzyme activities of a chernozem under different tillage management. Biology and Fertility of Soils 28:333–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12 Strauch, D. 1987. Animal Production and Environmental Health. World Animal Science Series B6. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p. 324.Google Scholar
13 Yeomans, J.C. and Bremner, J.M. 1989. A rapid and precise method for routine determination of organic carbon in soil. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 19:1467–1476.Google Scholar
14 Bremner, J.M. and Mulvaney, R.L. 1978. Urease activity in soils. In Burns, R.G. (ed.) Soil Enzymes. Academic Press, New York. p. 149–196.Google Scholar
15 Keeney, D.R. and Nelson, D.W. 1982. Nitrogen-inorganic forms. In Page, A.L., Miller, R.H. and Keeney, D.R. (eds). Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2, Chemical and Microbiological Properties. ASA and SSSA, Madison. p. 643–645.Google Scholar
16 Vance, E.D., Brookes, P.C., and Jenkinson, D. 1987. An extraction method for measuring microbial biomass carbon. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 19:703–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17 Garcia, C., Hernandez, M.T., and Costa, F. 1997. Potential use of dehydrogenase activity as index of microbial activity in degraded soils. Communication in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 28:123–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18 Kandeler, E. and Gerber, H. 1988. Short term assay of soil urease activity using colorimetric determination of ammonium. Biology and Fertility of Soils 6:68–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19 Bonmatí, M., Ceccanti, B., and Nannipieri, P. 1998. Protease extraction from soil by sodium pyrophosphate and chemical characterization of the extracts. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 30:2113–2125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20 Tabatabai, M.A. and Bremner, J.M. 1969. Use of p-nitrophenol phosphate in assay of soil phosphatase activity. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 1:301–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21 Eivazi, F. and Tabatabai, M.A. 1988. Glucosidase and galactosidases in soils. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 20:601–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22 Tukey, J.W. 1957. On the comparative anatomy of transformations. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 28:602–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23 Agricultural Web page www.infoagro.comGoogle Scholar
24 Sommer, S.G. and Husted, S. 1995. The chemical buffer system in raw and digested animal slurry. Journal of Agricultural Science 124:45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25 Bernal, M.P., Roig, A., Madrid, R., and Navarro, A.F. 1992. Salinity risks on calcareous soils following pig slurry applications. Soil Use and Managements 8:125–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26 Whalen, J.K., Chang, C., Clayton, G.W., and Carefoot, J.P. 2000. Cattle manure amendments can increase the pH of acid soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal 64:962–966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27 Ros, M. 2000. Recuperación de suelos agrícolas abandonados mediante el reciclaje en los mismos de residuos orgánicos. PhD thesis, University of Murcia.Google Scholar
28 Bosatta, E. and Agren, G.I. 1994. Dynamics of carbon and nitrogen in the organic matter of the soil. A generic theory. American Naturalist 138:227–245.Google Scholar
29 Plaza, C., Hernandez, D., Garcia-Gil, J.C., and Polo, A. 2004. Microbial activity in pig slurry-amended soils under semiarid conditions. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 36:1577–1585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30 Castellanos, J. and Pratt, P.F. 1981. Mineralization of manure nitrogen-correlation with laboratory indexes. Soil Science Society of American Journal 45:354–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31 Pahl, O., Godwin, R.J., Hann, M.J., and Waine, T.W. 2001. Cost-Effective Pollution control by shallow injection of pig slurry into growing crops. Journal Agriculture Engineering Research 80:381–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
32 Sarrantonio, M. 2003. Soil response to surface-applied residues of varying carbon-nitrogen ratios. Biology and Fertility of Soils 37:175–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
33 Sakamoto, K. and Oba, Y. 1991. Relationship between the amounts of organic material applied and soil biomass content. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition 37:387–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34 Dilly, O. and Munch, J.C. 1998. Ratios between estimates of microbial biomass content and microbial activity in soils. Biology and Fertility of Soils 27:374–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35 Ritz, K. and Robinson, D. 1988. Temporal variations in soil microbial biomass C and N under a spring barley crop. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 20:625–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36 Stevensson, K. and Pell, M. 2001. Soil microbial tests for discriminating between different cropping systems and fertiliser regimes. Biology and Fertility of Soils 33:91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37 Nannipieri, P., Grego, S., and Ceccanti, B. 1990. Ecological significance of the biological activity in soil. In Bollag, J.M. and Stotzky, G. (eds). Soil Biochemistry. Marcel Dekker Inc., New York. p. 293–355.Google Scholar
38 Serra-Wittling, C., Houot, S., and Barriuso, E. 1995. Soil enzymatic response to addition of municipal solid waste compost. Biology and Fertility of Soils 20:226–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39 Martens, D.A., Johanson, J.B., and Frankenberger, W.T. Jr 1992. Production and persistence of soil enzymes with repeated addition of organic residues. Soil Science 153:53–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40 Tabatabai, M.A. 1982. Soil Enzymes. In Page, A.L., Miller, R.H. and Keeney, D.R. (eds). Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 2. Chemical and Microbiological Properties. 2nd ed.American Society of Agronomy Soil Science Society of America, Madison. p. 903–947.Google Scholar
41 Bremner, J.M. and Mulvaney, R.L. 1978. Urease activity in soils. In Burns, R.G. (ed.) Soil Enzymes. Academic Press, New York. p. 149–196.Google Scholar
42 Diáz Marcote, I. and Polo, A. 1995. Evolution of the physical and chemical properties of soil with the application of MSW compost. In Proceedings of the XI International Conference on Solid Waste Technology and Management, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
43 Garcia, C., Roldan, A. and Hernandez, T. 1997. Changes in microbial activity after abandonment of cultivation in a semiarid Mediterranean environment. Journal of Environmental Quality 26:285–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
44 Dick, R.P., Rasmussen, P.E., and Kerle, E.A. 1988. Influence of long-term residue management on soil enzyme activities in relation to soil chemical properties in a wheat-fallow system. Biology and Fertility of Soils 6:159–164.Google Scholar
45 Garcia, C., Hernandez, T., Costa, F., Ceccanti, B., and Masciandaro, G. 1993. The dehydrogenase activity of soil as an ecological marker in processes of perturbed system regeneration. In Gallardo-Lancho, J. (ed.) Proceedings of the XI Internacional Symposium of Environmental Biochemistry. Salamanca, Spain. p. 89–100.Google Scholar
46 Pascual, J.A., Moreno, J.L., Hernández, T., and García, T. 2002. Persistence of immobilised and total urease and phosphatace activities in a soil attended with organic wastes. Bioresource Technology 82:73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
47 Garcia, C., Hernandez, T., and Roldan, A. 1998. Revegetation in semiarid zones: influence of terracing and organic refuse on microbial activity. Soil Science Society of American Journal 62:1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar