Cited by 3Soil and Water Nutrient DynamicsSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsAgricultural Science and Fertilization

Lower nitrate leaching from dairy cattle slurry compared to synthetic fertilizer calcium ammonium nitrate applied to grassland

Open access
de Boer, Herman C., van Mullekom, Mark, Smolders, Alfons J.P.·2024·Environmental Pollution

Abstract

Nitrate leaching from agriculture can be reduced by the choice of fertilizer and a proper timing of its application. For permanent grassland grown under temperate conditions, nitrate leaching was hypothesized to be lower from dairy cattle slurry (CS) compared to synthetic fertilizer calcium ammonium nitrate (CAN), based on differences in chemical composition, consequential effects on nitrogen (N) conversion processes in soil, and resulting differences in synchronization of (nitrate) N availability and plant N uptake. We tested the hypothesis in a two-year field experiment on cut grassland on a leaching-sensitive sandy soil, fertilized each year with 320 kg ha−1 of plant-available N from either 100% top-dressed CAN or a combination of 40% from CAN and 60% from sod-injected CS, and measured effects on grass herbage yield, herbage N uptake, and nitrate concentration in pore water at 1.0 m depth. Our results show a comparable level of herbage N uptake for both treatments, allowing for a proper comparison of nitrate leaching at a similar level of plant-available N. Average nitrate concentration in pore water in the main leaching period (over winter) was after the first ‘dry’ growing season 44% lower for CS + CAN (41 mg l−1) compared to CAN only (73 mg l−1), and after the second ‘wet’ growing season 35% lower for CS + CAN (32 mg l−1) compared to CAN only (49 mg l−1). Nitrogen application increased nitrate concentration at 1.0 m depth not only in winter but also in the growing season. We conclude that for permanent grasslands in temperate regions, nitrate leaching from timely applied CS may be considerably lower than from CAN, which is different from previous assumptions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123088

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
de Boer, H. C., van Mullekom, M., & Smolders, A. J. P.
Affiliations
B-Ware (Netherlands) (NL)
Venue
Environmental Pollution
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-03
Volume
344
Pages
123088
ISSN
0269-7491 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4389331262
Cited by
3
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 1
FWCI
0.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environmental Pollution (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Soil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
Keywords
nitrate leaching, dairy cattle slurry, calcium ammonium nitrate, mineral fertilizers, permanent grassland, nitrogen application timing, slurry injection, sandy soil
MeSH terms
Sand, Agriculture, Quaternary Ammonium Compounds, Animals, Cattle, Fertilizers, Nitrates, Nitrogen, Soil, Water, Grassland

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