4.7 Article

Achieving legislation requirements with different nitrogen fertilization strategies: Results from a long term experiment

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF AGRONOMY
Volume 77, Issue -, Pages 199-208

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eja.2016.02.004

Keywords

Nitrogen balance; Manure; Maize; Fertilization; Nitrates Directive; N use efficiency; Long-Term Experiment

Categories

Funding

  1. European Commission through FP7 project Catch-C [289782]
  2. European Commission through FP7 project ExpeER [262060]
  3. Regione Piemonte

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC, Anonymous, 1991) was developed in Europe to limit environmental threats from intensive livestock farming and N fertilizer applications to crops. It imposed several rules on farmers and public bodies, one of which was nutrient fertilization plan adoption. Here we use results from the Tetto Frati (Northern Italy) Long-Term Experiment to verify the terms and coefficients in the official Italian guidelines and evaluate the limitations imposed to organic fertilization amounts. For this purpose, we mined long-term experimental data of crop yield, N uptake, N use efficiency, and soil organic matter content from miscellanea cropping systems fertilized with farmyard manure (FYM) and bovine slurry (SLU), typical of a dairy farm in Northern Italy. N fertilization efficiency indicators (Removal to Fertilizer ratio, Apparent Recovery and Nitrogen Fertilizer Replacement Value) indicated that in the long run, FYM behaved similarly to urea, and better than SLU. Even N supply rates as high as 250 kg N ha(-1) were justified by high rates of crop removal. In fact, among the terms of the mass-balance equation, SOM mineralization was found to be most relevant, followed by meadow rotation residual effects. We conclude that a revised Nitrates Directives application scheme could be more relaxed in its application limit of manure-N, but should be more ambitious in setting efficiency coefficients for manure fertilization. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available