Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems

, Volume 93, Issue 1, pp 65–74 | Cite as

Synchrony of net nitrogen mineralization and maize nitrogen uptake following applications of composted and fresh swine manure in the Midwest U.S.

  • Terrance D. Loecke
  • Cynthia A. Cambardella
  • Matt Liebman
Original Article


Understanding how the quality of organic soil amendments affects the synchrony of nitrogen (N) mineralization and plant N uptake is critical for optimal agronomic N management and environmental protection. Composting solid livestock manures prior to soil application has been promoted to increase N synchrony; however, few field tests of this concept have been documented. Two years of replicated field trials were conducted near Boone, Iowa to determine the effect of composted versus fresh solid swine manure (a mixture of crop residue and swine urine and feces produced in hoop structures) on Zea mays (maize) N uptake, in situ soil net N mineralization, and soil inorganic N dynamics. Soil applications of composted manure increased maize N accumulation by 25 % in 2000 and 21 % in 2001 compared with fresh manure applications (application rate of 340 kg N ha−1). Despite significant differences in net N mineralization between years, within year seasonal total in situ net N mineralization was similar for composted and fresh manure applications. Partial N budgets indicated that changes in soil N pools (net N mineralization and soil inorganic N) in the surface 20 cm accounted for 67 % of the total plant N accumulation in 2000 but only 16 % in 2001. Inter-annual variation in maize N accumulation could not be attributed to soil N availability. Overall, our results suggest that composting manures prior to soil application has no clear benefit for N synchrony in maize crops. Further work is required to determine the biotic and abiotic factors underlying this result.


Asynchrony Corn Midwest Soil fertility Manure management 



We would like to thank to Jody Ohmacht, Jay Berkey, Dave Sundberg, and Rhonda Graeffor their invaluable assistance in the field and laboratory. This research was supported by Chamness Technology Inc. and the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture. We also thank two reviewers for thoughtful comments and suggestions.

Supplementary material

10705_2012_9500_MOESM1_ESM.eps (5.2 mb)
Fig. 1. Aboveground maize biomass accumulation in response to spring application of composted and fresh manure during 2000 and 2001, Boone, Iowa. The data from 2000 are presented in panels in the left column and from 2001 in panels in the right column. Error bars represent ±1 s.e. * indicates significance differences for a sampling date (P < 0.05). (EPS 5359 kb)


  1. Akaike H (1974) New look at statistical-model identification. IEEE Trans Autom Control 19:716–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amos B, Walters DT (2006) Maize root biomass and net rhizo deposited carbon: an analysis of the literature. Soil Sci Soc Am J 70:1489–1503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Asbjornsen H, Shepherd G, Helmers M, Mora G (2008) Seasonal patterns in depth of water uptake under contrasting annual and perennial systems in the Corn Belt Region of the Midwestern U.S. Plant Soil 308:69–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bohlke JK (2002) Groundwater recharge and agricultural contamination. Hydrogeol J 10:153–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brinton WF (1985) Nitrogen response of maize to fresh and composted manure. Biol Agric Hortic 3:55–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brye KR, Norman JM, Nordheim EV, Gower ST, Bundy LG (2002) Refinements to an in situ soil core technique for measuring net nitrogen mineralization in moist, fertilized agricultural soil. Agron J 94:864–869CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brye KR, Norman JM, Gower ST, Bundy LG (2003) Effects of management practices on annual net N-mineralization in a restored prairie and maize agroecosystems. Biogeochem 63:135–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cambardella CA, Richard TL, Russell A (2003) Compost mineralization in soil as a function of composting process conditions. Eur J Soil Biol 39:117–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clarholm M (1985) Interactions of bacteria, protozoa and plant leading to mineralization of soil nitrogen. Soil Bio Biochem 17:181–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crews TE, Peoples MB (2005) Can the synchrony of nitrogen supply and crop demand be improved in legume and fertilizer-based agroecosystems? A review. Nutr Cycl Agroecosys 72:101–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dahlin S, Kirchmann H, Katterer T, Gunnarsson S, Bergstrom L (2005) Possibilities for improving nitrogen use from organic materials in agricultural cropping systems. Ambio 34:288–295PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Eghball B (2000) Nitrogen mineralization from field-applied beef cattle feedlot manure or compost. Soil Sci Soc Am J 64:2024–2030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eghball B, Power JF (1999) Composted and noncomposted manure application to conventional and no-tillage systems: corn yield and nitrogen uptake. Agron J 91:819–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eno CF (1960) Nitrate production in the field by incubating the soil in polyethylene bags. Soil Sci Soc Am J 24:277–279CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hadas A, Kautsky L, Portnoy R (1996) Mineralization of composted manure and microbial dynamics in soil as affected by long-term nitrogen management. Soil Biol Biochem 28:733–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Holland EA, Lamarque JF (1997) Modeling bio-atmospheric coupling of the nitrogen cycle through NOx emissions and NOy deposition. Nutr Cycl Agroecosys 48:7–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Honeycutt CW, Potaro LJ, Halteman WA (1991) Predicting nitrate formation from soil, fertilizer, crop residue, and sludge with thermal units. J Environ Qual 20:850–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Honeycutt CW, Clapham WM, Leach SS (1994) A functional approach to efficient nitrogen use in crop production. Ecol Mod 73:51–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Honeyman, Harmon JD, Kliebenstein JB, Richard TL (2001) Feasibility of hoop structures for market swine in Iowa: pig performance, pig environment, and budget analysis. Appl Eng Agric 17:869–874Google Scholar
  20. IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: the physical science basis. Contribution of working group I. In: Solomon S et al (eds) Fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panal on climate change. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Johnson JMF, Barbour NW, Weyers SL (2007) Chemical composition of crop biomass impacts its decomposition. Soil Sci Soc Am J 71:155–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Karlen DL, Sadler EJ, Camp CR (1987) Dry matter, nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium accumulation rates by corn on Norfolk loamy sand. Agron J 79:649–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keeney DR, Nelson DW (1987) Nitrogen–inorganic forms, sec. 33–3, extraction of exchangeable ammonium, nitrate, and nitrite. In: Page et al. (ed) Methods of soil analysis: part 2, chemical and microbiological properties, vol 9. Soil Sci Soc Am, Madison, WI, USA, pp 648–649Google Scholar
  24. Li H, Wu J (2006) Uncertainty analysis in ecological studies: an overview. In: Wu J, Jones KB, Li H, Loucks OL (eds) Scaling and uncertainty analysis in ecology: methods and applications. Springer Press, The Netherlands, p 54Google Scholar
  25. Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, Wolfinger RD, Schabenberger O (2005) SAS for mixed models, 2nd edn. SAS Institute Inc, CaryGoogle Scholar
  26. Loecke TD, Robertson GP (2009) Soil resource heterogeneity in the form of aggregated litter alters maize productivity. Plant Soil 325:231–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Loecke TD, Liebman M, Cambardella CA, Richard TL (2004a) Corn growth responses to composted and fresh solid swine manures. Crop Sci 44:177–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Loecke TD, Liebman M, Cambardella CA, Richard TL (2004b) Corn response to composting and time of application of solid swine manure. Agron J 96:214–223Google Scholar
  29. Ma BL, Dwyer LM, Gregorich EG (1999a) Soil nitrogen amendment effects on nitrogen uptake and yield of maize. Agron J 91:650–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ma BL, Dwyer LM, Gregorich EG (1999b) Soil nitrogen amendment effects on seasonal nitrogen mineralization and nitrogen cycling in maize production. Agron J 91:1003–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mathur SP, Owen G, Dinel H, Schnitzer M (1993) Determination of compost biomaturity: I. Literature review. Biol Agric Hortic 10:65–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rabalais NN, Turner RE, Wiseman WJ (2001) Hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico. J Environ Qual 30:320–329PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Robertson GP (1997) Nitrogen use efficiency in row-crop agriculture: crop nitrogen use and soil nitrogen loss. In: Jackson L (ed) Ecology in agriculture. Academic Press, New York, pp 347–365Google Scholar
  34. Sanchez JE, Paul EA, Smeenk J (2002) Corn root effects on the nitrogen-supplying capacity of a conditioned soil. Agron J 94:391–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shi W, Norton JM, Miller BE, Pace MG (1999) Effects of aeration and moisture during windrow composting on the nitrogen fertilizer values of dairy waste composts. Appl Soil Ecol 11:17–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Smolder AJP, Lucassen ECHET, Bobbink R, Roelofs JGM, Lamers LPM (2010) How nitrate leaching from agricultural lands provides phosphate eutrophication in groundwater fed wetlands: the sulphur bridge. Biogeochem 98:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vitousek PM, Aber JD, Howarth RW, Likens GE, Matson PA, Schindler DW, Schlesinger WH, Tilman DG (1997) Human alteration of the global nitrogen cycle: sources and consequences. Eco App 7:737–750Google Scholar
  38. Wang JG, Bakken LR (1997) Competition for nitrogen during decomposition of plant residues in soil: effect of spatial placement of N-rich and N-poor plant residues. Soil Bio Biochem 29:153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Terrance D. Loecke
    • 1
    • 2
  • Cynthia A. Cambardella
    • 1
    • 3
  • Matt Liebman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of AgronomyIowa State UniversityAmesUSA
  2. 2.School of Natural ResourcesUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA
  3. 3.National Soil Tilth Laboratory ARS-USDAAmesUSA

Personalised recommendations