草畜粪便堆肥与无机肥料的比较:对土壤的养分贡献。

IF 0.3 Q4 AGRONOMY Terra Latinoamericana Pub Date : 2017-10-08 DOI:10.28940/TERRA.V35I4.198
O. A. H. Rodríguez, César Humberto Rivera Figueroa, Elías E. Díaz Ávila, Damaris Leopoldina Ojeda Barrios, V. Prieto
{"title":"草畜粪便堆肥与无机肥料的比较:对土壤的养分贡献。","authors":"O. A. H. Rodríguez, César Humberto Rivera Figueroa, Elías E. Díaz Ávila, Damaris Leopoldina Ojeda Barrios, V. Prieto","doi":"10.28940/TERRA.V35I4.198","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The use of livestock and plant wastes, as sources of nutrients and organic material to the soil, is a viable alternative to chemical fertilizers, which eventually cause serious risks to agroecosystems. The present study was conducted in 2013 in a greenhouse at FACIATEC-UACH, Chihuahua, Mexico. Four composts made with (a) cow manure, (b) hen manure, (c) sawdust and (d) maize stover were evaluated for their contribution of the soil macronutrients NO3-, P=, K+, Ca++, Mg++ and Na+ and compared with urea as a synthetic fertilizer and a control without fertilizer. The experiment was based on a completely randomized design; statistical analysis included an analysis of variance using the statistical package SAS (Statistical Analysis System) version 9.3.1 and comparison of means with the Tukey procedure (a = 0.05). Results suggest that f ive of the compost treatments increased the concentration of NO3-. Hen manure signif icantly outperformed cow manure in providing NO3- and P=. Likewise, the sawdust-based compost signif icantly affected the content of NO3-, outperforming the treatment based on maize stover. The concentration of Ca++ and Mg++ in soils resulting from the applied composts was lower than in the treatment with inorganic fertilizer, but that of Na+ was statistically higher than in the inorganic fertilizer treatment. This evidence suggests that the use of organic fertilizers, of either animal or plant origin, is a benef icial source of soil nutrients with high potential in sustainable agriculture.","PeriodicalId":52301,"journal":{"name":"Terra Latinoamericana","volume":"24 1 1","pages":"321-328"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Plant and livestock waste compost compared with inorganic fertilizer: nutrient contribution to soil.\",\"authors\":\"O. A. H. Rodríguez, César Humberto Rivera Figueroa, Elías E. Díaz Ávila, Damaris Leopoldina Ojeda Barrios, V. Prieto\",\"doi\":\"10.28940/TERRA.V35I4.198\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The use of livestock and plant wastes, as sources of nutrients and organic material to the soil, is a viable alternative to chemical fertilizers, which eventually cause serious risks to agroecosystems. The present study was conducted in 2013 in a greenhouse at FACIATEC-UACH, Chihuahua, Mexico. Four composts made with (a) cow manure, (b) hen manure, (c) sawdust and (d) maize stover were evaluated for their contribution of the soil macronutrients NO3-, P=, K+, Ca++, Mg++ and Na+ and compared with urea as a synthetic fertilizer and a control without fertilizer. The experiment was based on a completely randomized design; statistical analysis included an analysis of variance using the statistical package SAS (Statistical Analysis System) version 9.3.1 and comparison of means with the Tukey procedure (a = 0.05). Results suggest that f ive of the compost treatments increased the concentration of NO3-. Hen manure signif icantly outperformed cow manure in providing NO3- and P=. Likewise, the sawdust-based compost signif icantly affected the content of NO3-, outperforming the treatment based on maize stover. The concentration of Ca++ and Mg++ in soils resulting from the applied composts was lower than in the treatment with inorganic fertilizer, but that of Na+ was statistically higher than in the inorganic fertilizer treatment. This evidence suggests that the use of organic fertilizers, of either animal or plant origin, is a benef icial source of soil nutrients with high potential in sustainable agriculture.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52301,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Terra Latinoamericana\",\"volume\":\"24 1 1\",\"pages\":\"321-328\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-10-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Terra Latinoamericana\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.28940/TERRA.V35I4.198\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"AGRONOMY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Terra Latinoamericana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.28940/TERRA.V35I4.198","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

利用牲畜和植物废物作为土壤养分和有机物质的来源,是化肥的可行替代品,而化肥最终会对农业生态系统造成严重风险。本研究于2013年在墨西哥奇瓦瓦州FACIATEC-UACH的温室中进行。评价了(a)牛粪、(b)鸡粪、(c)锯末和(d)玉米秸秆4种堆肥对土壤宏量养分NO3-、P=、K+、Ca++、Mg++和Na+的贡献,并与尿素作为合成肥料和不施肥的对照进行了比较。实验采用完全随机设计;统计学分析采用统计学软件包SAS (statistical analysis System) 9.3.1版本进行方差分析,采用Tukey方法进行均值比较(a = 0.05)。结果表明,5种堆肥处理均能提高土壤中NO3-的浓度。鸡粪在提供NO3-和P=方面显著优于牛粪。同样,基于木屑的堆肥显著影响NO3-含量,优于基于玉米秸秆的处理。施用堆肥后土壤中Ca++和Mg++浓度低于无机肥处理,而Na+浓度高于无机肥处理。这一证据表明,使用动物或植物来源的有机肥是一种有益的土壤养分来源,在可持续农业中具有很高的潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Plant and livestock waste compost compared with inorganic fertilizer: nutrient contribution to soil.
The use of livestock and plant wastes, as sources of nutrients and organic material to the soil, is a viable alternative to chemical fertilizers, which eventually cause serious risks to agroecosystems. The present study was conducted in 2013 in a greenhouse at FACIATEC-UACH, Chihuahua, Mexico. Four composts made with (a) cow manure, (b) hen manure, (c) sawdust and (d) maize stover were evaluated for their contribution of the soil macronutrients NO3-, P=, K+, Ca++, Mg++ and Na+ and compared with urea as a synthetic fertilizer and a control without fertilizer. The experiment was based on a completely randomized design; statistical analysis included an analysis of variance using the statistical package SAS (Statistical Analysis System) version 9.3.1 and comparison of means with the Tukey procedure (a = 0.05). Results suggest that f ive of the compost treatments increased the concentration of NO3-. Hen manure signif icantly outperformed cow manure in providing NO3- and P=. Likewise, the sawdust-based compost signif icantly affected the content of NO3-, outperforming the treatment based on maize stover. The concentration of Ca++ and Mg++ in soils resulting from the applied composts was lower than in the treatment with inorganic fertilizer, but that of Na+ was statistically higher than in the inorganic fertilizer treatment. This evidence suggests that the use of organic fertilizers, of either animal or plant origin, is a benef icial source of soil nutrients with high potential in sustainable agriculture.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Terra Latinoamericana
Terra Latinoamericana Environmental Science-Ecology
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
49
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Importancia del Benzo(a)pireno en los sistemas biológicos y su biodegradación Acumulación y pérdida de suelo por erosión eólica en el norte de Zacatecas Producción de acelga (Beta vulgaris var. cicla L.) con efluente del cultivo de robalo (Centropomus viridis) en un sistema acuapónico Evolución de la intrusión marina y relaciones iónicas en el acuífero de La Paz BCS, México Estado hídrico y crecimiento de plantas de menta (Mentha spicata L.) bajo tratamientos con vermicompost y déficit hídrico
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1