Cited by 1,339Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas ProductionSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsAgriculture, Plant Science, Crop Management

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 122 of the 125 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects of anaerobic digestion on digestate nutrient availability and crop growth: A review

Möller, Kurt, Müller, Torsten·2012·Engineering in Life Sciences

Abstract

Anaerobic digestion (AD) for biogas production leads to several changes in the composition of the resulting digestates compared to the original feedstock (ammonia content, p H, carbon to nitrogen ratio, etc.), which are relevant for the plant availability of macro‐ and micronutrients after field application. Increased NH4+‐N content in digested slurries compared to undigested slurries does not guarantee improved uptake efficiency of slurry nitrogen and increased savings in fertilizer nitrogen. AD of crop residues and cover crops leads to an increase in the total amounts of mobile organic manures within the farming system, resulting in a higher nitrogen use efficiency and an increased scope for target‐oriented nitrogen application in time and space, when needed by the crop, as an alternative to the site‐bound soil incorporation as green manures. AD of dairy manure appears to reduce the fraction of immediate plant available phosphorus and micronutrients. This does, however, not affect short‐term crop availability under field conditions. More studies are needed to improve current knowledge on sulfur losses during AD and fertilizer value of digestates.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/elsc.201100085

Cites

122 of 122 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 125 references

3 of the 125 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 26

  1. Scheffer F., 1953, Über Veränderungen in der stofflichen Zusammensetzung des Stallmistes bei der biologischen Gaserzeugung, Landwirtsch. Forsch., 4, 61
  2. Joppich W., 1956, Das neue Wirtschaftsdüngemittel Bihuschlamm, Deut. Landwirt.‐Gesell. Mitt., 72, 559
  3. Sauerlandt W., 1956, Eigenschaften und Wirkungen der bei der biologischen Gasgewinnung aus Stallmist anfallenden organischen Dünger. Münchn, Beiträge zur Abwasser‐, Fischerei‐ und Flußbiologie, 3
  4. Wick H. Die Stoffbilanz bei Stalldünger nach Lagerung und nach Faulgärung mit Vegetationsversuchen über die Düngewirkung der gewonnen Rotteprodukte.PhD thesis University of Hohenheim Germany1960.
  5. Asmus F., 1988, Eigenschaften und Düngerwirkung von ausgefaulter Gülle aus der Biogasgewinnung, Arch. Acker‐ Pflanzenbau Bodenkd. Berl., 32, 527
  6. Zethner G., 2002, Qualität von Abfällen aus Biogasanlagen, 50
  7. Pötsch E. M. Nutrient content of fermentation residues from agricultural biogas systems and their utilization on permanent grassland. Final report 2005 pp. 32.
  8. Friedel J. K., 1996, Stickstoffmineralisierung von verflüssigtem, anaerob fermentiertem Rindermist im Boden, Agribiol. Res., 49, 1
  9. Gutser R., 1997, KTBL‐Arbeitspapier, 97
  10. Messner H., 1988, Düngewirkung anaerob fermentierter und unbehandelter Gülle, Diss. TU München, 166
  11. Roschke M., 2003, Ministerium für Landwirtschaft, Umweltschutz und Raumordnung Landes Brandenburg, 29
  12. 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2011.04.075 · DOI
  13. Neuner K.‐H., 2011, Proc. of the conference, Gülle 11 – Gülle und Gärrestdüngung auf Grünland” in Kloster Reute, 75
  14. Straka F. Jenicek P. Zabranska J. Dohanyos M.et al. Anaerobic fermentation of biomass and wastes with respect to sulfur and nitrogen contents in treated materials.Proceedings Sardinia 2007 11th International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium S. Margherita di Pula Cagliari Italy2007.
  15. 10.1002/bit.260250805 · DOI
  16. 10.1002/bit.260250806 · DOI
  17. Lake D. L., 1985, The effects of anaerobic digestion on heavy metal distribution in sewage sludge, Water Pollut. Control, 84, 549
  18. Liedl B. E., 2004, Proc. VII IS on Prot. Cult. Mild Winter Climates, ISHS Acta Hort, 647
  19. Laboski C. A. M., 2010, 19th World Congress of Soil Science, Soil solutions for a Changing World
  20. Maurer C. Müller J. Drying characteristics and nitrogen loss of biogas digestate during the drying process in:Proceedings of the 27th World congress of the International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering Québec Canada 2010 pp.1–8.
  21. Rauhe K., 1960, Über die Wirkung verschieden gelagerten Stalldüngers auf leichten und schweren Böden, Zeitschrift für Acker‐ und Pflanzenbau, 110, 135
  22. Rauhe K. Effects of organic manuring and cropping on soil humus and fertility in:Welte E. Szabolccs I.(Eds.) Proceedings of the 4th International CIEC Symposium Agricultural Waste Management and Environmental Protection Braunschweig Germany1987 pp55–76.
  23. Wendland M. Diepolder M. Capriel P. Leitfaden für die Düngung von Acker‐ und Grünland. Bayerische Landesanstalt für Landwirtschaft (LfL) (ed.). LfL‐Information. Available at:http://www.lfl.bayern.de/publikationen/daten/informationen/p_24402.pdf accessed February 24 2009.
  24. Roschke M. Plöchl M. Eigenschaften und Zusammensetzung der Gärreste in:LinkeB. et al. (Eds.) Biogas in der Landwirtschaft ‐ Leitfaden für Landwirte und Investoren im Land Brandenburg Freising-Weihenstephan Germany 2006 pp.36–39.
  25. Pfundtner E. Swoboda M. Qualität von Biogasgülle und Gärrückständen – Aktuelle Situation in Niederösterreich in:ALVA(Ed.) Proceedings ALVA – Jahrestagung2005 Linz Mai 23.–25 2005 190‐194. ISSN 1606‐612X.
  26. Martin J. H. A Comparison of Dairy Cattle Manure Management with and without Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Utilization. Report for the AgSTAR Program U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2004 pp.58. Available at:http://www.ncgreenpower.org/documents/nydairy2003. pdf accessed February 2 2007.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 901–1,000 of 1,000

Metadata

Authors
Möller, K., & Müller, T.
Affiliations
University of Hohenheim (DE)
Corresponding author
Möller, Kurt
Venue
Engineering in Life Sciences
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-05-11
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
242-257
ISSN
  • 1618-0240 (ISSN-L)
  • 1618-2863
OpenAlex
W1733859121
Cited by
1,339
References
125
Citations by year
2026: 136 · 2025: 121 · 2024: 107 · 2023: 108 · 2022: 120 · 2021: 148 · 2020: 124 · 2019: 127 · 2018: 80 · 2017: 98 · 2016: 62 · 2015: 49 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 3
FWCI
65.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Engineering in Life Sciences (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Agriculture, Plant Science, Crop Management
Keywords
anaerobic digestion, digestate, nutrient availability, crop growth, biogas, ammonia nitrogen, nitrogen use efficiency, phosphorus availability, micronutrients, crop residues, cover crops, dairy manure, slurry, green manure, sulfur loss, fertilizer value

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review