Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T02:32:41.534Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Addressing biophysical constraints for Australian farmers applying low rates of composted dairy waste to soil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

R. C. Hayes ,
J. I. McCormick ,
A. A. Oates ,
G. J. Poile ,
M. K. Conyers ,
M. J. Gardner ,
A. Price ,
P. O'Keeffe  and
G. D. Li
R. C. Hayes*
Affiliation:
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Pine Gully Road, Wagga Wagga NSW 2650, Australia
J. I. McCormick
Affiliation:
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Pine Gully Road, Wagga Wagga NSW 2650, Australia
A. A. Oates
Affiliation:
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Pine Gully Road, Wagga Wagga NSW 2650, Australia
G. J. Poile
Affiliation:
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Pine Gully Road, Wagga Wagga NSW 2650, Australia
M. K. Conyers
Affiliation:
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Pine Gully Road, Wagga Wagga NSW 2650, Australia
M. J. Gardner
Affiliation:
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Pine Gully Road, Wagga Wagga NSW 2650, Australia
A. Price
Affiliation:
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Pine Gully Road, Wagga Wagga NSW 2650, Australia
P. O'Keeffe
Affiliation:
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Pine Gully Road, Wagga Wagga NSW 2650, Australia
G. D. Li
Affiliation:
NSW Department of Primary Industries, Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Pine Gully Road, Wagga Wagga NSW 2650, Australia
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study examined the response of forage crops to composted dairy waste (compost) applied at low rates and investigated effects on soil health. The evenness of spreading compost by commercial machinery was also assessed. An experiment was established on a commercial dairy farm with target rates of compost up to 5 t ha−1 applied to a field containing millet [Echinochloa esculenta (A. Braun) H. Scholz] and Pasja leafy turnip (Brassica hybrid). A pot experiment was also conducted to monitor the response of a legume forage crop (vetch; Vicia sativa L.) on three soils with equivalent rates of compost up to 20 t ha−1 with and without ‘additive blends’ comprising gypsum, lime or other soil treatments. Few significant increases in forage biomass were observed with the application of low rates of compost in either the field or pot experiment. In the field experiment, compost had little impact on crop herbage mineral composition, soil chemical attributes or soil fungal and bacterial biomass. However, small but significant increases were observed in gravimetric water content resulting in up to 22.4 mm of additional plant available water calculated in the surface 0.45 m of soil, 2 years after compost was applied in the field at 6 t ha−1 dried (7.2 t ha−1 undried), compared with the nil control. In the pot experiment, where the soil was homogenized and compost incorporated into the soil prior to sowing, there were significant differences in mineral composition in herbage and in soil. A response in biomass yield to compost was only observed on the sandier and lower fertility soil type, and yields only exceeded that of the conventional fertilizer treatment where rates equivalent to 20 t ha−1 were applied. With few yield responses observed, the justification for applying low rates of compost to forage crops and pastures seems uncertain. Our collective experience from the field and the glasshouse suggests that farmers might increase the response to compost by: (i) increasing compost application rates; (ii) applying it prior to sowing a crop; (iii) incorporating the compost into the soil; (iv) applying only to responsive soil types; (v) growing only responsive crops; and (vi) reducing weed burdens in crops following application. Commercial machinery incorporating a centrifugal twin disc mechanism was shown to deliver double the quantity of compost in the area immediately behind the spreader compared with the edges of the spreading swathe. Spatial variability in the delivery of compost could be reduced but not eliminated by increased overlapping, but this might represent a potential 20% increase in spreading costs.

Keywords

humicmineral compositionsoil watermanurefertilizer applicationnodulationnutrition
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , April 2018 , pp. 179 - 193
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

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.)

Footnotes

2

Present address: School of Agriculture and Wine Science, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Wagga Wagga NSW 2650, Australia

3

Present address: AMPS Agribusiness, Suite 3, 27 Bourke Street, Tamworth, NSW 2340, Australia

References

Billingham, K. 2012. Humic Products Potential or Presumption for Agriculture. Department of Primary Industries, NSW. Available at Web site http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/publications Google Scholar
Chan, K.Y., Conyers, M.K., and Scott, B.J. 2007. Improved structural stability of an acidic hardsetting soil attributable to lime application. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 38:2163–2175.Google Scholar
Colwell, J.D. 1963. The estimation of the phosphorus fertilizer requirements of wheat in southern New South Wales by soil analysis. Australian Journal Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 3:190–198.Google Scholar
Conyers, M.K. and Davey, B.G. 1990. The variability of pH in acid soils of the southern highlands of New South Wales. Soil Science 150(4):695–704.Google Scholar
Corbin, E.J., Brockwell, J., and Gault, R.R. 1977. Nodulation studies on chickpea (Cicer arietinum). Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 17(84):126–134.Google Scholar
Cordell, D., Drangert, J.-O., and White, S. 2009. The story of phosphorus: Global food security and food for thought. Global Environmental Change 19(2):292–305.Google Scholar
Edmeades, D.C. 2002. The effects of liquid fertilisers derived from natural products on crop, pasture, and animal production: A review. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 53(8):965–976.Google Scholar
Gee, G.W. and Bauder, J.W. 1986. Particle-size analysis. In Klute, A. (ed.). Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 1. Physical and Mineralogical Methods-Agronomy Monograph no. 9. 2nd ed.). American Society of Agronomy–Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 383–409.Google Scholar
Gillman, G. and Sumpter, E. 1986. Modification to the compulsive exchange method for measuring exchange characteristics of soils. Soil Research 24(1):61–66.Google Scholar
Gourley, C.J.P., Aarons, S.R., and Powell, J.M. 2012a. Nitrogen use efficiency and manure management practices in contrasting dairy production systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 147:73–81.Google Scholar
Gourley, C.J.P., Dougherty, W.J., Weaver, D.M., Aarons, S.R., Awty, I.M., Gibson, D.M., Hannah, M.C., Smith, A.P., and Peverill, K.I. 2012b. Farm-scale nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and sulfur balances and use efficiencies on Australian dairy farms. Animal Production Science 52(10):929–944.Google Scholar
Guo, Y.J., Li, G.D., Hayes, R.C., Dear, B.S., and Price, A. 2012. Tolerance of the annual legumes Biserrula pelecinus, Ornithopus sativa, Trifolium spumosum, T. vesiculosum and T. subterraneum to soil acidity. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 55:1–14.Google Scholar
Hayes, R.C., Conyers, M.K., Poile, G., Oates, A., and Li, G.D. 2010a. Spatial and temporal variability in organic carbon observed in soil under lucerne pastures. In Dove, H. and Culvenor, R.A. (ed.). Food Security from Sustainable Agriculture. Proceedings of 15th Agronomy Conference. Australian Society of Agronomy, Lincoln, New Zealand. http://www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2010/crop-production/high-rainfallzone/7056_hayesrc.htm Google Scholar
Hayes, R.C., Li, G.D., Dear, B.S., Conyers, M.K., and Virgona, J.M. 2010b. Phalaris and lime – improving productivity on an acidic soil in a drought-prone ‘high-rainfall’ environment. In Dove, H. and Culvenor, R.A. (ed.). Food Security from Sustainable Agriculture. Proceedings of 15th Agronomy Conference. Australian Society of Agronomy, Lincoln, New Zealand. http://www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2010/crop-production/subsoil/7053_hayesrc.htm Google Scholar
Haynes, R.J. and Naidu, R. 1998. Influence of lime, fertilizer and manure applications on soil organic matter content and soil physical conditions: A review. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 51(2):123–137.Google Scholar
Horrell, R., Metherell, A.K., Ford, S., and Doscher, C. 1999. Fertiliser evenness - losses and costs: a study on the economic benefits of uniform applications of fertiliser. Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Association 61:215–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houlbrooke, D.J. and Laurenson, S. 2013. Effect of sheep and cattle treading damage on soil microporosity and soil water holding capacity. Agricultural Water Management 121:81–84.Google Scholar
Isbell, R.F. 1996. The Australian Soil Classification. CSIRO, Melbourne.Google Scholar
Jezierska-Tys, S., Magdalena, F., and Tys, J. 2010. Microbiological hazards resulting from application of dairy sewage sludge: Effects on occurrence of pathogenic microorganisms in soil. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part A 73:1194–1201.Google Scholar
Kaiser, A.G., Dear, B.S., and Morris, S.G. 2007. An evaluation of the yield and quality of oat-legume and ryegrass–legume mixtures and legume monocultures harvested at three stages of growth for silage. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 47(1):25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klute, A. 1986. Water retention: laboratory methods. In Klute, A. (ed.). Methods of Soil Analysis. 2nd ed. Part 1: Physical and Mineralogical Methods. American Society of Agronomy-Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 635–660.Google Scholar
Lal, R., Reicosky, D.C., and Hanson, J.D. 2007. Evolution of the plow over 10,000 years and the rationale for no-till farming. Soil and Tillage Research 93(1):1–12.Google Scholar
Laurenson, S. and Houlbrooke, D.J. 2014. Nutrient and microbial loss in relation to timing of rainfall following surface application of dairy farm manure slurries to pasture. Soil Research 52(5):513–520.Google Scholar
Lawrence, H.G. and Yule, I.J. 2007. Estimation of the in-field variation in fertiliser application. New Zealand Journal of Agricultural Research 50(1):25–32.Google Scholar
Marshall, T.J. 1947. Mechanical Composition of Soil in Relation to Field Descriptions of Texture. Bulletin No. 224. CSIRO, Australia.Google Scholar
Min, D.H., Vough, L.R., Chekol, T., and Kim, D.A. 1999. Effects of surface applied dairy slurry on herbage yield and stand persistences: II. Alfalfa, orchardgrass, tall fescue and alfalfa-orchardgrass. Asian-Australian Journal of Animal Science 12(5):766–771.Google Scholar
Quilty, J.R. and Cattle, S.R. 2011. Use and understanding of organic amendments in Australian agriculture: A review. Soil Research 49(1):1–26.Google Scholar
Roper, M.M. 2005. Managing soils to enhance the potential for bioremediation of water repellency. Australian Journal of Soil Research 43(7):803–810.Google Scholar
‘t Mannetje, L. and Haydock, K.P. 1963. The dry-weight-rank method for the botanical analysis of pasture. Journal of British Grassland Society 18:268–275.Google Scholar
Walkley, A. and Black, I.A. 1934. An examination of the Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modicication of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37:29–38.Google Scholar
Ward, G. and Jacobs, J.L. 2008. Effectiveness of dairy first pond sludge as a nutrient source for forage crop production. In Unkovich, M. (ed.). Global Issues, Paddock Action. Proceedings of the 14th Australian Society of Agronomy Conference. Australian Society of Agronomy, Adealide, SA.Google Scholar
Yoder, R.E. 1936. A direct method of aggregate analysis of soils and a study of the physical nature of erosion losses. Journal of the American Society of Agronomy 28:337–351.Google Scholar