Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T14:43:47.424Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Productivity in an arable and stockless organic cropping system may be enhanced by strategic recycling of biomass

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2017

Tora Matilda Råberg*
Affiliation:
Department of Biosystems and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden.
Georg Carlsson
Affiliation:
Department of Biosystems and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden.
Erik Steen Jensen
Affiliation:
Department of Biosystems and Technology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden.
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

Recirculation of nitrogen (N) from crop residue and green-manure biomass resources may reduce the need to add new reactive N to maintain crop yield and quality. The aim of this study was to determine how different strategies for recycling residual and green-manure biomass influence yield and N concentration of the edible parts of food crops in a stockless organic cropping system. For this purpose, three biomass distribution treatments were investigated in a field experiment, based on a cropping system designed to produce both high-quality food crops and biomass resources from crop residues, cover crops and a green-manure ley. The three treatments, applied at the cropping system level, were: (1) incorporating the aboveground biomass resources in situ (IS); (2) harvesting, ensiling and redistributing the same biomass resources to the non-legume crops (biomass redistribution, BR); and (3) harvesting, ensiling and using the biomass resources as substrate for production of bio-methane via anaerobic digestion (AD) followed by distribution of the digestate as bio-fertilizer to the non-legume crops. The redistribution of ensiled (BR) and digested (AD) biomass did not increase the yield of the edible parts in winter rye (Secale cereal L.), white cabbage (Brassica oleracea L.) or red beet (Beta vulgaris L.) compared with leaving the biomass on the ground at harvest (IS). The BR treatment increased the yield of lentil intercropped with oat, compared with IS treatment in one of the two studied years. The total biomass yield of the cover crop following winter rye was significantly higher in the BR treatment than in IS in both years. The legume proportion in the green-manure ley was significantly higher in the AD and BR treatments as compared with IS in one of the experimental years. This study showed that strategic biomass redistribution has the potential to enhance biomass productivity while maintaining food crop yields, thereby enhancing whole system productivity. Biomass redistribution systems both with and without biogas digestion offer a new strategy for the development of multifunctional arable cropping systems that rely on internal nutrient cycling.

Type
Research Paper
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.)

References

Araj, S.E. and Wratten, S.D. 2015. Comparing existing weeds and commonly used insectary plants as floral resources for a parasitoid. Biological Control 81:1520.Google Scholar
Askegaard, M., Olesen, J.E., Rasmussen, I.A., and Kristensen, K. 2011. Nitrate leaching from organic arable crop rotations is mostly determined by autumn field management. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 142:149160.Google Scholar
Baggs, E.M., Rees, R.M., Castle, K., Scott, A., Smith, K.A., and Vinten, A.J.A. 2002. Nitrous oxide release from soils receiving N-rich crop residues and paper mill sludge in eastern Scotland. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 90:109123.Google Scholar
Barbir, J., Badenes-Pérez, F.R., Fernández-Quintanilla, C., and Dorado, J. 2015. The attractiveness of flowering herbaceous plants to bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) and hoverflies (Diptera: Syrphidae) in agro-ecosystems of Central Spain. Agricultural and Forest Entomology 17:2028.Google Scholar
Beck, D., Wery, J., Saxena, M., and Ayadi, A. 1991. Dinitrogen fixation and nitrogen balance in cool-season food legumes. Agronomy Journal 83:334341.Google Scholar
Bedoussac, L., Journet, É.P., Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Naudin, C., Corre-Hellou, G., Prieur, L., Jensen, E.S., and Justes, E. 2014. Eco-functional intensification by cereal-grain legume intercropping in organic farming systems for increased yields, reduced weeds and improved grain protein concentration. In S. Bellon and S. Penvern (eds). Organic Farming, Prototype for Sustainable Agricultures. Springer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. p. 4763.Google Scholar
Bertholdsson, N. 1999. Characterization of malting barley cultivars with more or less stable grain protein content under varying environmental conditions. European Journal of Agronomy 10:18.Google Scholar
Breland, T.A. 1995. Green manuring with clover and ryegrass catch crops undersown in spring wheat: Effects on soil structure. Soil Use and Management 11:163167.Google Scholar
Cabrera, M.L., Kissel, D.E., and Vigil, M.F. 2005. Nitrogen mineralization from organic residues. Journal of Environmental Quality 34:7579.Google Scholar
Carlsson, G. and Huss-Danell, K. 2003. Nitrogen fixation in perennial forage legumes in the field. Plant and Soil 253:353372.Google Scholar
Chanakya, H., Venkatsubramaniyam, R., and Modak, J. 1997. Fermentation and methanogenic characteristics of leafy biomass feedstocks in a solid phase biogas fermentor. Bioresource Technology 62:7178.Google Scholar
Cohen, B.R. 2015. The story of N: A social history of the nitrogen cycle and the challenge of sustainability. Agricultural History 89:117118.Google Scholar
Deckers, J.A., Nachtergaele, F., and Spaargaren, O.C. 1998. World Reference Base for Soil Resources: Introduction. ACCO. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome.Google Scholar
De Wit, C. and Van den Bergh, J. 1965. Competition between herbage plants. Journal of Agricultural Science 13:212221.Google Scholar
Diederichsen, E., Frauen, M., Linders, E.G.A., Hatakeyama, K., and Hirai, M. 2009. Status and perspectives of clubroot resistance breeding in crucifer crops. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation 28:265281.Google Scholar
Doré, T., Makowski, D., Malézieux, E., Munier-Jolain, N., Tchamitchian, M., and Tittonell, P. 2011. Facing up to the paradigm of ecological intensification in agronomy: Revisiting methods, concepts and knowledge. European Journal of Agronomy 34:197210.Google Scholar
Drinkwater, L.E. and Snapp, S.S. 2007. Nutrients in agroecosystems: Rethinking the management paradigm. Advances in Agronomy 92:163186.Google Scholar
Evans, J., O'connor, G., Turner, G., Coventry, D., Fettell, N., Mahoney, J., Armstrong, E., and Walsgott, D. 1989. N2 fixation and its value to soil N increase in lupin, field pea and other legumes in south-eastern Australia. Crop and Pasture Science 40:791805.Google Scholar
Foley, J.A., Ramankutty, N., Brauman, K.A., Cassidy, E.S., Gerber, J.S., Johnston, M., Mueller, N.D., O'Connell, C., Ray, D.K., West, P.C., Balzer, C., Bennett, E.M., Carpenter, S.R., Hill, J., Monfreda, C., Polasky, S., Rockstrom, J., Sheehan, J., Siebert, S., Tilman, D., and Zaks, D.P.M. 2011. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 478:337342.Google Scholar
Frøseth, R.B., Bakken, A.K., Bleken, M.A., Riley, H., Pommeresche, R., Thorup-Kristensen, K., and Hansen, S. 2014. Effects of green manure herbage management and its digestate from biogas production on barley yield, N recovery, soil structure and earthworm populations. European Journal of Agronomy 52:90102.Google Scholar
Galloway, J.N., Townsend, A.R., Erisman, J.W., Bekunda, M., Cai, Z., Freney, J.R., Martinelli, L.A., Seitzinger, S.P., and Sutton, M.A. 2008. Transformation of the nitrogen cycle: Recent trends, questions, and potential solutions. Science 320:889892.Google Scholar
Gunnarsson, A. 2012. Plant-based biogas production for improved nutrient management of beetroot in stockless organic farming. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae Sueciae 83:16526880.Google Scholar
Gunnarsson, A., Bengtsson, F., and Caspersen, S. 2010. Use efficiency of nitrogen from biodigested plant material by ryegrass. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 173:113119.Google Scholar
Gunnarsson, A., Lindén, B., and Gertsson, U. 2011. Biodigestion of plant material can improve nitrogen use efficiency in a red beet crop sequence. HortScience 46:765775.Google Scholar
Gutser, R., Ebertseder, T., Weber, A., Schraml, M., and Schmidhalter, U. 2005. Short-term and residual availability of nitrogen after long-term application of organic fertilizers on arable land. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 168:439446.Google Scholar
Hagman, J., Halling, M., and Dryler, K. 2014. Stråsäd, trindsäd, oljeväxter, potatis: Sortval 2014. Department of Plant Production Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Uppsala.Google Scholar
Halberg, N., Panneerselvam, P., and Treyer, S. 2015. Eco-functional intensification and food security: Synergy or compromise? Sustainable Agricultural Research 4(3):126139.Google Scholar
Harvey, M. and Pilgrim, S. 2011. The new competition for land: Food, energy, and climate change. Food Policy 36:S40S51.Google Scholar
Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Jørnsgaard, B., Kinane, J., and Jensen, E.S. 2008. Grain legume–cereal intercropping: The practical application of diversity, competition and facilitation in arable and organic cropping systems. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 23:312.Google Scholar
Hejcman, M., Szaková, J., Schellberg, J., and Tlustoš, P. 2010. The Rengen Grassland Experiment: Relationship between soil and biomass chemical properties, amount of elements applied, and their uptake. Plant and Soil 333:163179.Google Scholar
Jensen, E.S. 1996. Grain yield, symbiotic N2 fixation and interspecific competition for inorganic N in pea-barley intercrops. Plant and Soil 182:2538.Google Scholar
Jensen, E.S. 1997. The Role of Grain Legume N2 Fixation in the Nitrogen Cycling of Temperate Cropping Systems. Risø National Laboratory, Roskilde, Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark. p. 86, pp. +13 appendices.Google Scholar
Jensen, E.S., Bedoussac, L., Carlsson, G., Journet, E.-P., Justes, E., and Hauggaard-Nielsen, H. 2015. Enhancing yields in organic crop production by ECO-functional intensification. Sustainable Agriculture Research 4:42.Google Scholar
Kalinova, J., Vrchotova, N., and Triska, J. 2007. Exudation of allelopathic substances in buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum Moench). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 55:64536459.Google Scholar
Kumar, K. and Goh, K.M. 2002. Management practices of antecedent leguminous and non-leguminous crop residues in relation to winter wheat yields, nitrogen uptake, soil nitrogen mineralization and simple nitrogen balance. European Journal of Agronomy 16:295308.Google Scholar
Ledgard, S. and Steele, K. 1992. Biological nitrogen fixation in mixed legume/grass pastures. Plant and Soil 141:137153.Google Scholar
Lehtomäki, A., Huttunen, S., Lehtinen, T., and Rintala, J. 2008. Anaerobic digestion of grass silage in batch leach bed processes for methane production. Bioresource Technology 99:32673278.Google Scholar
Li, X. 2015. Legume-Based Catch Crops for Ecological Intensification in Organic Framing. Department of Agroecology, Science and Technology, Aarhus University, Tjele, Denmark. p. 97.Google Scholar
Lissens, G., Vandevivere, P., De Baere, L., Biey, E., and Verstraete, W. 2001. Solid waste digestors: Process performance and practice for municipal solid waste digestion. Water Science and Technology 44:91102.Google Scholar
MEA. 2005. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, Ecosystems and Human Well-Being. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC, Island Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Möller, K. and Müller, T. 2012. Effects of anaerobic digestion on digestate nutrient availability and crop growth: A review. Engineering in Life Sciences 12:242257.Google Scholar
Möller, K. and Stinner, W. 2009. Effects of different manuring systems with and without biogas digestion on soil mineral nitrogen content and on gaseous nitrogen losses (ammonia, nitrous oxides). European Journal of Agronomy 30:116.Google Scholar
Möller, K., Stinner, W., Deuker, A., and Leithold, G. 2008. Effects of different manuring systems with and without biogas digestion on nitrogen cycle and crop yield in mixed organic dairy farming systems. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 82:209232.Google Scholar
Nicolardot, B., Recous, S., and Mary, B. 2001. Simulation of C and N mineralisation during crop residue decomposition: A simple dynamic model based on the C : N ratio of the residues. Plant and Soil 228:83103.Google Scholar
Niggli, U., Slabe, A., Schmid, O., Halberg, N., and Schlüter, M. 2008. Vision for an Organic Food and Farming Research Agenda 2025–Organic Knowledge for the Future. Report. Organic e-prints. Technology Platform Organics. IFOAM Regional Group European Union (IFOAM EU Group), Brussels and International Society of Organic Agriculture Research (ISOFAR), Bonn, Germany. p. 145.Google Scholar
Peoples, M.B., Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., and Jensen, E.S. 2009. The potential environmental benefits and risks derived from legumes in rotations. In D.W. Emerich and H. Krishnan (eds). Nitrogen Fixation in Crop Production. Agronomy Monograph, 52. American Society of Agronomy: Crop Science Society of America: Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 349–385.Google Scholar
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F.S., Lambin, E.F., Lenton, T.M., Scheffer, M., Folke, C., and Schellnhuber, H.J. 2009. A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461:472475.Google Scholar
Sapp, M., Harrison, M., Hany, U., Charlton, A., and Thwaites, R. 2015. Comparing the effect of digestate and chemical fertiliser on soil bacteria. Applied Soil Ecology 86:19.Google Scholar
Spurway, C.H. and Lawton, K. 1949. Soil Testing: A Practical System of Soil Fertility Diagnosis. Agriculture Experiment Station, Michigan State College, East Lansing.Google Scholar
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S.E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E.M., Biggs, R., Carpenter, S.R., de Vries, W., and de Wit, C.A. 2015. Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347:1259855.Google Scholar
Stinner, W., Moller, K., and Leithold, G. 2008. Effects of biogas digestion of clover/grass-leys, cover crops and crop residues on nitrogen cycle and crop yield in organic stockless farming systems. European Journal of Agronomy 29:125134.Google Scholar
Sutton, M.A., Oenema, O., Erisman, J.W., Leip, A., van Grinsven, H., and Winiwarter, W. 2011. Too much of a good thing. Nature 472:159161.Google Scholar
Thorup-Kristensen, K. 2001. Are differences in root growth of nitrogen catch crops important for their ability to reduce soil nitrate-N content, and how can this be measured? Plant and Soil 230:185195.Google Scholar
Tilman, D., Socolow, R., Foley, J.A., Hill, J., Larson, E., Lynd, L., Pacala, S., Reilly, J., Searchinger, T., and Somerville, C. 2009. Beneficial biofuelsthe food, energy, and environment trilemma. Science 325:270271.Google Scholar
Trinsoutrot, I., Recous, S., Bentz, B., Lineres, M., Cheneby, D., and Nicolardot, B. 2000. Biochemical quality of crop residues and carbon and nitrogen mineralization kinetics under nonlimiting nitrogen conditions. Soil Science Society of America Journal 64(3):918926.Google Scholar
Tuomisto, H.L. and Helenius, J. 2008. Comparison of energy and greenhouse gas balances of biogas with other transport biofuel options based on domestic agricultural biomass in Finland. Agricultural and Food Science 17(3):240251.Google Scholar
Watson, C.A., Atkinson, D., Gosling, P., Jackson, L.R., and Rayns, F.W. 2002. Managing soil fertility in organic farming systems. Soil Use and Management 18:239247.Google Scholar
Wulf, S., Maeting, M., and Clemens, J. 2002. Application technique and slurry co-fermentation effects on ammonia, nitrous oxide, and methane emissions after spreading. Journal of Environmental Quality 31:17951801.Google Scholar
Zillén, L., Conley, D.J., Andrén, T., Andrén, E., and Björck, S. 2008. Past occurrences of hypoxia in the Baltic Sea and the role of climate variability, environmental change and human impact. Earth-Science Reviews 91:7792.Google Scholar