Tillage and Compost Affect Yield of Corn, Soybean, and Wheat and Soil Fertility

by concerns about nutrient loading. Increased on-site nutrient loading from concentrated animal feeding opApplying organic matter (OM) amendments to cropland reduces erations (CAFOs) have prompted investigations into requirements for synthetic fertilizer and may eliminate yield differalternative uses for manure produced in various liveences between conventional and minimum tillage. The objectives of this research were to determine how tillage and composted swine stock management systems. Because manure handling (Sus scrofa L.) manure affected yield of corn (Zea mays L.), soybean in modern dairy (Bos taurus) and swine production sys[Glycine max (L.) Merr], and wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and tems is usually in a liquid or slurry form, hauling costs soil concentrations of OM, P, and K. A corn–soybean–wheat/clover to distribute this dilute manure from large CAFOs can (Trifolium spp.) rotation, in all phases, was initiated in 1998 in plots be prohibitive. Compost, which has a lower water conthat had been managed with moldboard plow (MP), chisel plow, or tent than fresh manure, can provide more cost-effective no-till since 1988. Moldboard and chisel plow increased corn yield in transport of manure-derived nutrients to cropland offthe first year of the study vs. no-till. Thereafter, tillage did not affect site of CAFOs or other large-scale livestock facilities yield on plots that received compost. Tillage compost interactions (Richard and Choi, 1999). A new swine management during the last 2 yr of the study increased no-till compost yield 11% housing system uses hoop structures (Honeyman et al., vs. no compost. Soybean yield was similar in no-till and chisel compost plots during the study period and between MP and no-till in 3 of 4 2001) in which solid manure is mixed with corn stalks yr. Tillage compost interactions were observed in 2 of 4 yr that or grain straw bedding materials. Opportunities exist to increased no-till compost yield 9% vs. no compost. Averaged across haul this nutrient and C source to reduce on-site loading. all crops and tillage, compost-amended soil had 63 g kg 1 OM and Bosch and Napit (1992) concluded that off-site transfer 164 mg kg 1 P vs. 56 and 55 in no compost. Corn and soybean producof poultry litter, which averaged 465 g kg 1 water, was ers can enhance yield with multiple compost applications and elimieconomically viable but was adversely affected by transnate yield differences between conventional and no-till systems. Nevportation costs. They reported profitable transfer of ertheless, compost application for soil OM enhancement must be poultry litter from surplus to deficit areas up to 81 km. balanced with P input to minimize the potential for excessive soil Utilizing composting to manage nutrient inputs for P accumulation. crop production presents certain challenges. Surface compost application may not be as efficient as incorporation because of additional N loss or nutrient stratificaR data from the Conservation Technology Intion. Eghball (2000) reported that 11% of the organic formation Center (CTIC) indicate that no-till corn N that was applied the previous fall was mineralized acreage in the Midwest has not increased in recent years. from composted beef cattle feedlot manure and that N Land area in no-till corn in 2000 was 17% compared mineralization was similar in no-till and conventional with 18% in 2002 (CTIC, 2002). Corn producers are tillage even though the compost was surface-applied in reluctant to use no-till in corn production because of no-till. Eghball and Power (1999a) in Nebraska reported inconsistent yields compared with intermediate or intensimilar dryland corn grain yields in no-till and convensive tillage systems (Erbach, 1982; Kaspar et al., 1987). tional tillage (disking and cultivation) with beef feedlot Kaspar et al. (1990) recommended removing a 16-cm compost in 3 of 4 yr. In the fourth year, no-till yielded band of residue from the row area to increase corn stand less than conventional tillage with compost application. and hasten emergence. Nevertheless, reports in the literCompost application rates were similar in both tillage ature present inconsistent results comparing modified systems and were selected to provide 151 kg N ha 1 in no-till (using row cleaners) to conventional tillage systems. their continuous corn study. They concluded that surEnvironmental concerns from soil erosion are rivaled face application of beef feedlot manure or composted manure did not result in significant N loss. Other studies J.W. Singer, K.A. Kohler, and C.A. Cambardella, USDA-ARS, Natl. have reported different N requirements for no-till vs. Soil Tilth Lab., 2150 Pammel Drive, Ames, IA 50011; M. Liebman, conventional tillage. Stecker et al. (1995) found that noDep. of Agron., 3405 Agronomy Hall, Iowa State Univ., Ames, IA till corn following soybean on poorly drained claypan 50011; T.L. Richard, Dep. of Agric. and Biosyst. Eng., 3222 Natl. soils required 17 kg ha 1 more fertilizer N than a chiselSwine Res. and Inf. Cent., Iowa State Univ., Ames, IA 50011; and D.D. Buhler, Dep. of Crop and Soil Sci., 286 Plant and Soil Sci., disk system for maximum corn yield and 45 kg ha 1 Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI 48824. Trade and company more N for maximum profit. names are used for the benefit of readers and do not imply endorseApplying OM amendments to soil increases soil ferment by the USDA or Iowa State University. Received 15 Apr. 2003. *Corresponding author ([email protected]). Abbreviations: CAFOs, concentrated animal feeding operations; Published in Agron. J. 96:531–537 (2004).  American Society of Agronomy LSNT, late-spring soil NO3–N; MP, moldboard plow; OM, organic matter. 677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA