Cited by 10Agricultural Science and FertilizationSoil Management and Crop YieldSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics

Organic amendment effects on crop productivity and nutrient uptake on reclaimed natural gas wellsites

Zvomuya, Francis, Larney, Francis J., DeMaere, Paul R., Olson, Andrew F.·2008·Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems

Abstract

Restoration of productivity on agricultural soils disturbed by industrial activity is important for agronomic and environmental reasons. Because of the role of organic matter in soil health and quality, organic amendments have been widely used in the reclamation of disturbed soils such as those on abandoned oil and natural gas wellsites. This study examined the effects of one-time applications of alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) hay or beef cattle (Bos taurus) feedlot manure compost on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) yield and nutrient uptake on two abandoned natural gas wellsites that had recently been reclaimed in southern Alberta, Canada. The base amendment rate (1x) [dry wt.] was 5.3 Mg ha-¹ for compost and 3.1 Mg ha-¹ for alfalfa. The five treatment amendment rates of 0, 1x, 2x, 4x, and 8x were soil-incorporated at the wellsites. Yields and plant nutrient uptake were generally higher at Hussar than at Turin, reflecting the higher inherent fertility of the soil at Hussar. Grain yields were similar for alfalfa and compost amendments, indicating that either amendment can be used depending on availability and/or transportation costs. Our results show that spring wheat yields on these reclaimed soils can be optimized at alfalfa and compost rates of no more than 6 and 10 Mg ha-¹, respectively. Continued monitoring of crop productivity and soil properties may provide insight into the long-term benefits of alfalfa and compost amendments in wellsite reclamation schemes.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10705-007-9137-z

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Spring wheat yields on reclaimed well-site soils can be optimized at alfalfa and compost rates of no more than 6 and 10 Mg per hectare, respectively, at lower rates than would lead to environmental concerns.

    “For the same study, Zvomuya et al. (2008) showed that spring wheat yields on these reclaimed soils can be optimized at alfalfa and compost rates of no more than 6 and 10 Mg ha (1 , respectively, at lower rates than would lead to environmental concerns.”

    From The role of organic amendments in soil reclamation: A review (2012) · cites this paper as Zvomuya et al. 2008

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zvomuya, F., Larney, F. J., DeMaere, P. R., & Olson, A. F.
Affiliations
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (CA)
Corresponding author
Larney, Francis J.
Venue
Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems
Published
2007-09-14
Volume
80
Issue
3
Pages
223-232
ISSN
  • 1385-1314 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-0867
OpenAlex
W1984545488
Cited by
10
References
18
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Management and Crop Yield
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Keywords
organic amendments, soil reclamation, alfalfa hay, cow manure compost, wheat yield, nutrient uptake, disturbed soil, soil fertility, southern Alberta

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