Effects of Biogas Slurry Application on Crop Production and Soil Properties in a Rice–Wheat Rotation on Coastal Reclaimed Farmland

  • Yifan Tang
  • Guoliang Wen
  • Pingping Li
  • Cheng Dai
  • Jiangang HanEmail author


The field experiment of a rice–wheat rotation system was conducted on a coastal reclaimed farmland with different application rates of biogas slurry from a large-scale standardized hoggery. Crop yield, grain quality, and soil properties were examined to determine the appropriate application rate. At the slurry application rates of 480 m3 ha−1 for rice and 9.00–11.25 m3 ha−1 for wheat, grain yields of rice and wheat were 8.9 and 15.7% higher than those under conventional fertilization, respectively. When 840 m3 ha−1 biogas slurry was applied to the rice field, the grain amino acid content was significantly higher than that of conventionally fertilized rice. In the rice–wheat rotation system, under biogas slurry treatments, soil pH and EC did not significantly increase; the contents of soil Pb, Cr, Cu, and Zn were within allowable limits; the contents of soil alkali-hydrolyzable nitrogen were greatly increased and significantly higher than those under conventional fertilization treatment; and the content of soil organic matter had no significant difference with that under no fertilization treatment. Therefore, the recommended application rate of biogas slurry on coastal reclaimed farmland should be 480 and 9.00–11.25 m3 ha−1 for rice and wheat, respectively.


Biogas slurry Standardized hoggery Coastal zone Rice Wheat Heavy metal 



This study was financially supported by the Doctorate Fellowship Foundation of Nanjing Forestry University, the Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD), the “Six Talent Peaks” Project of Jiangsu Province (2016-NY-064), the Jiangsu Agriculture Science and Technology Innovation Fund (JASTIF) (CX(16)1003-8), and the Key Project of Science and Technology Support (Agriculture) of the Jiangsu Province (BE2013382). The authors would like to thank numerous farmers for the fieldwork, Prof. Jianming Xue for revising and improving the manuscript, and anonymous referees for their valuable suggestions that improve the manuscript.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Alburquerque, J. A., de la Fuente, C., Campoy, M., Carrasco, L., Najera, I., Baixauli, C., et al. (2012). Agricultural use of digestate for horticultural crop production and improvement of soil properties. European Journal of Agronomy, 43, 119–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkinson, C. J., Fitzgerald, J. D., & Hipps, N. A. (2010). Potential mechanisms for achieving agricultural benefits from biochar application to temperate soils: a review. Plant and Soil, 337(1–2), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bachmann, S., Gropp, M., & Eichler-Lobermann, B. (2014). Phosphorus availability and soil microbial activity in a 3 year field experiment amended with digested dairy slurry. Biomass & Bioenergy, 70, 429–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bian, B., Lin, C., & Lv, L. (2016). Health risk assessment of heavy metals in soil-plant system amended with biogas slurry in Taihu basin, China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(17), 16955–16964.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen, Y., Shi, Q., & Chen, Y. (2015). Effects of continuous irrigation of biogas slurry on nutrient and heavy metal content in soil of dry land and paddy fields. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 29, 76–80 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  6. Du, Z. J., Chen, X. M., Qi, X. B., Li, Z. Y., Nan, J. K., & Deng, J. Q. (2016). The effects of biochar and hoggery biogas slurry on fluvo-aquic soil physical and hydraulic properties: a field study of four consecutive wheat-maize rotations. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 16(8), 2050–2058.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Garg, R. N., Pathak, H., Das, D. K., & Tomar, R. K. (2005). Use of flyash and biogas slurry for improving wheat yield and physical properties of soil. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 107(1–3), 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Huang, L. F., Yang, J., Gao, W., Yang, W. K., Cui, X. Y., & Zhuang, H. Y. (2016). Effects of pig slurry as basal and panicle fertilizer on trace element content and grain quality in direct-seeding rice. Sustainability, 8(8), 714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Islam, M. R., Rahman, S. M. E., Rahman, M. M., Oh, D. H., & Ra, C. S. (2010). The effects of biogas slurry on the production and quality of maize fodder. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 34(1), 91–99.Google Scholar
  10. Lee, S. Y., Dunn, R. J. K., Young, R. A., Connolly, R. M., Dale, P. E. R., Dehayr, R., et al. (2006). Impact of urbanization on coastal wetland structure and function. Austral Ecology, 31(2), 149–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Li, T., & Yang, X. (2004). Soil dissolved organic matter and its effect on chemical and biological behaviors of soil heavy metals. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 15, 1083–1087 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  12. Li, T. X., Han, Y. W., Li, Y. Y., Lu, Z. M., & Zhao, P. (2016). Urgency, development stage and coordination degree analysis to support differentiation management of water pollution emission control and economic development in the eastern coastal area of China. Ecological Indicators, 71, 406–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Liu, S., Wang, L., Li, X., Chen, Y., & Fu, M. (2014). Potential risk assessment of heavy metal in biogas slurry irrigation. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer, 20, 1517–1524 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  14. Loria, E. R., Sawyer, J. E., Barker, D. W., Lundvall, J. P., & Lorimor, J. C. (2007). Use of anaerobically digested swine manure as a nitrogen source in corn production. Agronomy Journal, 99(4), 1119–1129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lu, R. (1999). Analysis methods of soil science and agricultural chemistry. Beijing: Agriculture Science and Technology Press.Google Scholar
  16. Lu, J., Jiang, L. N., Chen, D. J., Toyota, K., Strong, P. J., Wang, H. L., et al. (2012). Decontamination of anaerobically digested slurry in a paddy field ecosystem in Jiaxing region of China. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 146(1), 13–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mantovi, P., Baldoni, G., & Toderi, G. (2005). Reuse of liquid, dewatered, and composted sewage sludge on agricultural land: effects of long-term application on soil and crop. Water Research, 39(2–3), 289–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nobre, A. M. (2011). Scientific approaches to address challenges in coastal management. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 434, 279–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Peu, P., Birgand, F., & MartineZ, J. (2007). Long term fate of slurry derived nitrogen in soil: a case study with a macro-lysimeter experiment having received high loads of pig slurry (Solepur). Bioresource Technology, 98(17), 3228–3234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rodriguez-Vila, A., Asensio, V., Forjan, R., & Covelo, E. F. (2016). Assessing the influence of technosol and biochar amendments combined with Brassica juncea L. on the fractionation of Cu, Ni, Pb and Zn in a polluted mine soil. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 16(2), 339–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stinner, W., Moller, K., & Leithold, G. (2008). Effects of biogas digestion of clover/grass-leys, cover crops and crop residues on nitrogen cycle and crop yield in organic stockless farming systems. European Journal of Agronomy, 29(2–3), 125–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tang, W., Wu, J., Sun, B., Yang, G., & Yang, Q. (2010). Effects of application amounts of biogas slurry on yield and quality of rice. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 29, 2268–2273 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  23. Tang, J., Fang, T., Hou, K., Zhao, R., & Liang, S. (2014). Rules and impact factors of greenhouse gases emission in the saline-alkali paddy fields in different years. Environmental Science, 35, 4727–4734 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  24. Terhoeven-Urselmans, T., Scheller, E., Raubuch, M., Ludwig, B., & Joergensen, R. G. (2009). CO2 evolution and N mineralization after biogas slurry application in the field and its yield effects on spring barley. Applied Soil Ecology, 42(3), 297–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Win, A. T., Toyota, K., Ito, D., Chikamatsu, S., Motobayashi, T., Takahashi, N., et al. (2016). Effect of two whole-crop rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars on methane emission and Cu and Zn uptake in a paddy field fertilized with biogas slurry. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 62(1), 99–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wu, S., Cui, C., Zhang, X., Li, W., Pang, C., & Dong, R. (2013). Effect of biogas slurry on yield increase, quality improvement, water and soil environment. Transactions of the Chinese Society for Agricultural Machinery, 8, 118–125 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  27. Xie, G., Liu, Q., Rong, X., Song, H., Peng, J., & Peng, H. (2007). The effects of three cultivation methods on amino acid content of rice grains and preliminary study on its mechanism. Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer Science, 13, 781–788 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  28. Xiong, X. O., Li, Y. X., Li, W., Lin, C. Y., Han, W., & Yang, M. (2010). Copper content in animal manures and potential risk of soil copper pollution with animal manure use in agriculture. Resources Conservation and Recycling, 54(11), 985–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yang, J., Wang, C., & Dai, H. (2008). Analysis methods of soil agricultural chemistry and environmental monitoring. Beijing: China Land Press.Google Scholar
  30. Zaniewicz-Bajkowska, A., Rosa, R., Franczuk, J., & Kosterna, E. (2007). Direct and secondary effect of liming and organic fertilization on cadmium content in soil and in vegetables. Plant Soil and Environment, 53(11), 473–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Zhang, J., Zhang, M., Dan, S., Luo, L., & Wang, M. (2009). Growth status, grain yield and heavy metals content of rice (Oryza sativa L.) as affected by biogas slurry application. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 28, 2005–2009 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  32. Zhang, L., Wu, J., Yang, G., Zhang, Y., Feng, D., & Wang, M. (2014). Effects of continuous applications of digested pig biogas slurry on brassica napus yields and rapeseed quality. Journal of Agro-Environment Science, 33, 562–568 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  33. Zhang, S. H., Hua, Y. M., & Deng, L. W. (2016). Nutrient status and contamination risks from digested pig slurry applied on a vegetable crops field. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(4), 406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhao, Q., Wu, J., Chen, B., & Lv, W. (2012). Effect of biogas slurry on heavy metal accumulation of soil and maize. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 26, 251–255 (In Chinese).Google Scholar
  35. Zhao, Z., Ball, J., & Hazelton, P. (2018). Application of statistical inference for analysis of heavy metal variability in roadside soil. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 229(1), 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zheng, X. B., Fan, J. B., Cui, J., Wang, Y., Zhou, J., Ye, M., et al. (2016). Effects of biogas slurry application on peanut yield, soil nutrients, carbon storage, and microbial activity in an Ultisol soil in southern China. Journal of Soils and Sediments, 16(2), 449–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yifan Tang
    • 1
  • Guoliang Wen
    • 1
  • Pingping Li
    • 1
    • 2
  • Cheng Dai
    • 3
  • Jiangang Han
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.College of Biology and the EnvironmentNanjing Forestry UniversityNanjingChina
  2. 2.Collaborative Innovation Center of Sustainable Forestry in Southern China of Jiangsu ProvinceNanjing Forestry UniversityNanjingChina
  3. 3.COFCO Meat (Jiangsu) Co., LtdDongtaiChina

Personalised recommendations