Cited by 120Agricultural Science and FertilizationSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics

Nitrogen fertilizer replacement value of undigested liquid cattle manure and digestates

Cavalli, Daniele, Cabassi, Giovanni, Borrelli, Lamberto, Geromel, Gabriele, Bechini, Luca, Degano, Luigi, Marino Gallina, Pietro·2016·European Journal of Agronomy

Abstract

Accurate estimation of animal manure nitrogen (N) availability is required to maximize crop N use efficiency and reduce environmental N losses. Many field and laboratory experiments have shown that first-year net mineralization of manure organic N is often negligible, which often causes crop available N to approximate the ammonium N content of the manure. Anaerobic digestion increases the ammonium share and reduces the C to organic N ratio of animal manures, potentially increasing their N fertilizer value.In 2011, we undertook a three-year field experiment in Northern Italy to estimate the N fertilizer value of four manures: undigested cattle slurry, digested cattle slurry-maize mix, and liquid and solid fractions of the digested slurry-maize mix. The experiment also allowed us to test if ammonium recovery was similar among manures, and between manures and ammonium sulphate. Fertilizers were applied annually to plots before silage maize cultivation that was followed by an unfertilized Italian ryegrass crop.Results showed that the recovery of ammonium from manure in maize did not differ significantly compared to ammonium sulphate among all the fertilizers in 2013; however, in 2011 and 2012 it was significantly lower for all manures except digested slurry-maize mix and its liquid fraction in 2011.The increased recovery of applied N in 2012 and 2013 for solid fraction and undigested manure were likely due to the residual effect of previously applied organic N.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eja.2015.10.007

Cites

42 of 42 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cavalli, D., Cabassi, G., Borrelli, L., Geromel, G., Bechini, L., Degano, L., & Marino Gallina, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Milan (IT)
  • Consiglio per la ricerca in agricoltura e l’analisi dell’economia agraria (IT)
Corresponding author
Cavalli, Daniele
Venue
European Journal of Agronomy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-02
Volume
73
Pages
34-41
ISSN
1161-0301 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2235188870
Cited by
120
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 4
FWCI
10.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
European Journal of Agronomy (publishedVersion)
Funders
Italian Ministry of Agriculture D.M.
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Soil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Keywords
nitrogen fertilizer value, cattle manure, anaerobic digestion, digestate, ammonium recovery, ammonium sulfate, organic nitrogen mineralization, corn silage, Lolium multiflorum, residual nitrogen effect, crop nitrogen use efficiency

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