Trade-offs in soil fertility management on arable farms

Trade-offs in soil fertility management on arable farms Crop production and soil fertility management implies a multitude of decisions and activities on crop choice, rotation design and nutrient management. In practice, the choices to be made and the resulting outcomes are subject to a wide range of objectives and constraints. Objectives are economic as well as environmental, for instance sequestering carbon in agricultural soils or reducing nitrogen losses. Constraints originate from biophysical and institutional conditions that may restrict the possibilities for choosing crops or using specific cultivation and fertilization practices. To explore the consequences of management interventions to increase the supply of organic C to the soil on income and N losses, we developed the linear programming model NutMatch. The novelty of the model is the coherent description of mutual interdependencies amongst a broad range of sustainability indicators related to soil fertility management in arable cropping, enabling the quantification of synergies and trade-offs between objectives. NutMatch was applied to four different crop rotations subjected to four fertiliser strategies differing in the use of the organic fertilisers cattle slurry, pig slurry or compost, next to mineral fertiliser. Each combination of rotation and fertiliser strategy contributed differently to financial return, N emissions and organic matter inputs into the soil.Our model calculations show that, at the rotational level, crop residues, cattle slurry and compost each substantially contributed to SOC accumulation (range 200-450 kg C ha-1 yr-1), while contributions of pig slurry and cover crops were small (20-50 kg C ha-1 yr-1). The use of compost and pig slurry resulted in increases of 0.61-0.73 and 3.15-3.38 kg N2O-N per 100 kg extra SOC accumulated, respectively, with the other fertilizers taking an intermediate position. From a GHG emission perspective, the maximum acceptable increase is 0.75 kg N2O-N per 100 kg extra SOC accumulated, which was only met by compost. Doubling the winter wheat area combined with the cultivation of cover crops to increase SOC accumulation resulted in a net GHG emission benefit, but was associated with a financial trade-off of 2.30-3.30 euro per kg SOC gained.Our model calculations suggest that trade-offs between C inputs and emissions of greenhouse gases (notably N2O) or other pollutants (NO3, NH3) can be substantial. Due to the many data from a large variety of sources incorporated in the model, the trade-offs are uncertain. Our model-based explorations provide insight in soil carbon sequestration options and their limitations vis-a-vis other objectives. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Agricultural Systems Elsevier

Trade-offs in soil fertility management on arable farms

Loading next page...
 
/lp/elsevier/trade-offs-in-soil-fertility-management-on-arable-farms-d0NN9MWczm
Publisher
Elsevier
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd
ISSN
0308-521x
D.O.I.
10.1016/j.agsy.2016.09.013
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Crop production and soil fertility management implies a multitude of decisions and activities on crop choice, rotation design and nutrient management. In practice, the choices to be made and the resulting outcomes are subject to a wide range of objectives and constraints. Objectives are economic as well as environmental, for instance sequestering carbon in agricultural soils or reducing nitrogen losses. Constraints originate from biophysical and institutional conditions that may restrict the possibilities for choosing crops or using specific cultivation and fertilization practices. To explore the consequences of management interventions to increase the supply of organic C to the soil on income and N losses, we developed the linear programming model NutMatch. The novelty of the model is the coherent description of mutual interdependencies amongst a broad range of sustainability indicators related to soil fertility management in arable cropping, enabling the quantification of synergies and trade-offs between objectives. NutMatch was applied to four different crop rotations subjected to four fertiliser strategies differing in the use of the organic fertilisers cattle slurry, pig slurry or compost, next to mineral fertiliser. Each combination of rotation and fertiliser strategy contributed differently to financial return, N emissions and organic matter inputs into the soil.Our model calculations show that, at the rotational level, crop residues, cattle slurry and compost each substantially contributed to SOC accumulation (range 200-450 kg C ha-1 yr-1), while contributions of pig slurry and cover crops were small (20-50 kg C ha-1 yr-1). The use of compost and pig slurry resulted in increases of 0.61-0.73 and 3.15-3.38 kg N2O-N per 100 kg extra SOC accumulated, respectively, with the other fertilizers taking an intermediate position. From a GHG emission perspective, the maximum acceptable increase is 0.75 kg N2O-N per 100 kg extra SOC accumulated, which was only met by compost. Doubling the winter wheat area combined with the cultivation of cover crops to increase SOC accumulation resulted in a net GHG emission benefit, but was associated with a financial trade-off of 2.30-3.30 euro per kg SOC gained.Our model calculations suggest that trade-offs between C inputs and emissions of greenhouse gases (notably N2O) or other pollutants (NO3, NH3) can be substantial. Due to the many data from a large variety of sources incorporated in the model, the trade-offs are uncertain. Our model-based explorations provide insight in soil carbon sequestration options and their limitations vis-a-vis other objectives.

Journal

Agricultural SystemsElsevier

Published: Oct 1, 2017

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off