Abstract
Double cropping forage cereal rye (Secale cereale L.) with corn (Zea mays L.) and injecting liquid dairy cow (Bos taurus L.) manure in the fall may increase manure nutrient utilization and total forage production. Although potentially economically and environmentally beneficial, these practices have not been widely adopted by Northeastern U.S. farmers. This 2-yr full-factorial experiment conducted in Pennsylvania quantified the effects of (a) rye management (RyeM; early terminated cover crop, CC vs. double crop harvested approximately 1 wk later, DC) and (b) manure application method (ManM; unincorporated broadcasted manure, BM vs. shallow disk injected manure, IM) on rye biomass, rye apparent manure nitrogen and phosphorus recovery (ANR and APR, respectively), subsequent corn silage yield, and total forage production (DC + summer corn silage) and the effect of ManM on DC forage nutritive value. Double cropping increased rye biomass 143%, ANR 119%, APR 126%, and total forage production 29–44% compared to CC. While IM did not increase net returns on rye silage production compared to BM, IM improved rye forage nutritive value by increasing ANR by 84%, rye crude protein by 29%, net energy of lactation by 10%, and reduced neutral detergent fiber (NDF) by 10%. Injecting manure also increased summer corn yield 21% and total forage 13% when rye was harvested as DC compared to DC with BM. Farmers adopting DC can increase total forage production and nutrient recovery and, when combined with IM, forage production and rye quality can potentially be improved.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 2968-2977 |
| Number of pages | 10 |
| Journal | Agronomy Journal |
| Volume | 112 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jul 1 2020 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Agronomy and Crop Science
Access to Document
Other files and links
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Manure injection and rye double cropping increased nutrient recovery and forage production'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver
}
In: Agronomy Journal, Vol. 112, No. 4, 01.07.2020, p. 2968-2977.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Manure injection and rye double cropping increased nutrient recovery and forage production
AU - Binder, Jonathan M.
AU - Karsten, Heather D.
AU - Beegle, Doug B.
AU - Dell, Curtis J.
N1 - Funding Information: All rye, variety ‘Aroostook’ (Ernst Conservation Seeds, Meadville, PA), was seeded at a rate of 135 kg ha−1 with a Great Plains 1005 solid-stand no-till drill (Great Plains, Salina, KS) with rows spaced at 19 cm on 26 September 2016 and 15 September 2017. Experimental plots were 4.6 by 9.1 m. All management was completed with no-till practices. Liquid dairy slurry from a large, local dairy was applied at a target wet weight rate of 70 Mg ha−1 on all dates for all treatments parallel to rye rows. This manure rate was calculated based on a Pennsylvania dairy farm with a high dairy livestock stocking rate, as described by Holly, Gunn, Rotz, and Kleinman (2019) who used USDA survey data to classify Pennsylvania farms types. This manure rate was greater than the 42 or 49 Mg ha−1 application rate of a similar study (Milliron et al., 2019). One manure sample was taken from the manure spreader at each application date. Nitrogen analysis was determined by combustion (Watson, Wolf, & Wolf, 2003) and P analysis was conducted by microwave-assisted nitric acid digestion and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (Wolf, Watson, & Wolf, 2003). Application rates were measured with a load cell-equipped manure spreader. Manure was applied onto established rye on 8 November 2016 at 216 kg N ha−1 and 47 kg P ha−1 and on 9 November 2017 and at 247 kg N ha−1 and 37 kg P ha−1. Depending on the treatment, BM manure was broadcasted with six splash plates or IM manure was injected with six shallow-disc injectors (Yetter, Colchester, IL) attached to a modified toolbar behind the manure spreader. Shallow-disc injectors were spaced at 75 cm. A drop hose located behind a disc placed manure approximately 10–15 cm below the soil surface and two parabolic disks trailed to close the injection slit. During manure injection, no effort was made to avoid rye plants or inject between rye rows. Other than fall applied manure and 15 kg N ha−1 as starter fertilizer (10–20–20, N–P–K) at corn planting, no additional fertilizer was applied in order to evaluate experimental treatment effects on rye and corn yields and nutrient recovery. Rye CC treatments were terminated at Feekes Growth Stage 8 on 24 April 2017 and at Feekes Growth Stage 7 on 1 May 2018 (Feekes, 1941) with 1.26 kg ae ha−1 of glyphosate (N-[phosphonomethyl]glycine). Rye DC treatments were harvested with a small-plot Carter flail harvester (Carter, Brookston, IN) at Feekes Growth Stage 10.5 on 1 May 2017 and Feekes Growth Stage 10 on 9 May 2018. Biomass of CC was measured by hand-clipping aboveground plant matter at the soil surface from two 0.25-m2 quadrats (avoiding the center of the plot where corn yield strips would be harvested) and drying in a 45 °C forced-air oven until a constant weight was measured. A yield strip was collected for rye DC with a load-cell equipped 1-m wide Carter flail harvester at 7.6 cm above ground level. Biomass was sampled from different heights depending on rye treatment to represent farmer practices and to calculate the aboveground rye nutrient pools that were recovered and remained in the cover crop or were removed as rye silage. Rye DC samples were dried using the same CC protocol to calculate biomass. Aboveground whole-plant tissue samples from 10 randomly-selected plants outside of the center of the plot for CC and separate from the DC yield strip were collected and analyzed for N with an Elementar Vario Max N/C Analyzer (Horneck & Miller, 1998). Rye P content was determined with a nitric acid and peroxide digest (Huang & Schulte, 1985) before analysis by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (Varian 730-ES; Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA). Rye regrowth and weeds were controlled with an application of glyphosate and 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (1.26 kg ae ha−1 glyphosate, 0.53 kg ae ha−1 2,4-D) 1 wk after DC harvest. Corn hybrids TA 583-22D (TA Seeds, Jersey Shore, PA; 108-d relative maturity) in 2017, and Seedway 5478GEN VT3P (Seedway, LLC, Hall, NY; 106-d relative maturity) in 2018 were planted on all treatments on 16 May 2017 and 25 May 2018 with a John Deere 1780 no-till planter (Deere & Company, Moline, IL) on 76-cm row spacing at a rate of 79,040 seeds ha−1. Corn is typically planted 1–2 wk after rye cover crop termination, but planting is often delayed due to excessive soil moisture or cold weather. Corn was planted for both treatments 15 d after DC harvest in 2017 and 16 d after DC harvest in 2018. Corn plant population was determined both years by counting the number of plants in a representative 3-m section per plot approximately 7 wk after planting. Corn was harvested for silage from two center rows on 29 September 2017 and 4 October 2018 with a front mounted Champion 1200 chopper (Maschinenfabrik KEMPER GmbH & Co, Stadtlohn, Germany). A representative 200-g sample was collected at the time of chopping with an integrated Hege sampler (Wintersteiger, Salt Lake City, UT). To assess the effect of the manure management on the forage quality of the rye silage, we simulated the process of dairy farms fermenting rye forage in silos to preserve the forage for feeding at a later date. To simulate silage production, 200-g rye DC subsamples from the harvested yield strip were dried to 60% moisture, vacuum-sealed in storage bags, and incubated at 30 °C for at least 3 wk (Tanjore, Ricchard, & Marshall, 2012) before forage analysis. Near infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) was completed with Foss NIRSystems Models XDS and 6500 with ISIScan v.4.6.1 (Eden Praire, MN). Forage samples were analyzed for crude protein (CP; Padmore, 1990), neutral detergent fiber (NDF; Padmore, 1990), and net energy of lactation (NEL; National Research Council, 1989). Total forage for DC treatment combinations was calculated by adding DC biomass to subsequent corn silage yields while total forage for CC treatment combinations was equal to subsequent corn silage yields. Fall and spring growing degree days (GDDs), base 4.4 °C (Mirsky, Curran, Mortenseny, Ryany, & Shumway, 2011), were calculated for rye. The experiment was conducted at the Russell E. Larson Agricultural Research Center at Rock Springs (The Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania Furnace, PA; 40°42′N, 77°58′W) from September 2016 to October 2018 on a Hagerstown silt loam soil (fine, mixed, semiactive, mesic Typic Hapludalf) with portions of (0–3 and 3–8%) slope. Experimental plots were moved to an adjacent portion of the field for the second year of the study. The field was in oats (Avena sativa L.) prior to the initiation of the experiment and in wheat prior to the second year of the experiment. Soil was sampled before rye planting for soil fertility in both years. In the first year, the field had a soil pH of 6.4, 32 mg P kg−1, and 66 mg K kg−1. In the second year, the soil had a pH of 5.9, 27 ppm P, and 67 ppm K. Although soil pH levels were below optimum the second year, lime had been applied within the previous 18 mo and pH was expected to rise. Both years potash was applied before the experiment to bring soil K to an optimum level as per the soil test recommendation. The experiment was a two-level, full-factorial experiment for two factors (manure management, ManM and rye management, RyeM) arranged in a randomized complete block design with five replications. We used no-manure control plots with rye to calculate ANR and APR. Recovery of manure N was calculated using the formula (Guillard et al., 1995): ANR%=RyeNattreatment−RyeNwithoutmanureManuretotalNapplied100 By substituting rye and manure P for N, APR was also calculated using this P-modified formula (Reddy, Rao, Reddy, & Takkar, 1999). All rye, variety ‘Aroostook’ (Ernst Conservation Seeds, Meadville, PA), was seeded at a rate of 135 kg ha−1 with a Great Plains 1005 solid-stand no-till drill (Great Plains, Salina, KS) with rows spaced at 19 cm on 26 September 2016 and 15 September 2017. Experimental plots were 4.6 by 9.1 m. All management was completed with no-till practices. Liquid dairy slurry from a large, local dairy was applied at a target wet weight rate of 70 Mg ha−1 on all dates for all treatments parallel to rye rows. This manure rate was calculated based on a Pennsylvania dairy farm with a high dairy livestock stocking rate, as described by Holly, Gunn, Rotz, and Kleinman (2019) who used USDA survey data to classify Pennsylvania farms types. This manure rate was greater than the 42 or 49 Mg ha−1 application rate of a similar study (Milliron et al., 2019). One manure sample was taken from the manure spreader at each application date. Nitrogen analysis was determined by combustion (Watson, Wolf, & Wolf, 2003) and P analysis was conducted by microwave-assisted nitric acid digestion and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (Wolf, Watson, & Wolf, 2003). Application rates were measured with a load cell-equipped manure spreader. Manure was applied onto established rye on 8 November 2016 at 216 kg N ha−1 and 47 kg P ha−1 and on 9 November 2017 and at 247 kg N ha−1 and 37 kg P ha−1. Depending on the treatment, BM manure was broadcasted with six splash plates or IM manure was injected with six shallow-disc injectors (Yetter, Colchester, IL) attached to a modified toolbar behind the manure spreader. Shallow-disc injectors were spaced at 75 cm. A drop hose located behind a disc placed manure approximately 10–15 cm below the soil surface and two parabolic disks trailed to close the injection slit. During manure injection, no effort was made to avoid rye plants or inject between rye rows. Other than fall applied manure and 15 kg N ha−1 as starter fertilizer (10–20–20, N–P–K) at corn planting, no additional fertilizer was applied in order to evaluate experimental treatment effects on rye and corn yields and nutrient recovery. Rye CC treatments were terminated at Feekes Growth Stage 8 on 24 April 2017 and at Feekes Growth Stage 7 on 1 May 2018 (Feekes, 1941) with 1.26 kg ae ha−1 of glyphosate (N-[phosphonomethyl]glycine). Rye DC treatments were harvested with a small-plot Carter flail harvester (Carter, Brookston, IN) at Feekes Growth Stage 10.5 on 1 May 2017 and Feekes Growth Stage 10 on 9 May 2018. Biomass of CC was measured by hand-clipping aboveground plant matter at the soil surface from two 0.25-m2 quadrats (avoiding the center of the plot where corn yield strips would be harvested) and drying in a 45 °C forced-air oven until a constant weight was measured. A yield strip was collected for rye DC with a load-cell equipped 1-m wide Carter flail harvester at 7.6 cm above ground level. Biomass was sampled from different heights depending on rye treatment to represent farmer practices and to calculate the aboveground rye nutrient pools that were recovered and remained in the cover crop or were removed as rye silage. Rye DC samples were dried using the same CC protocol to calculate biomass. Aboveground whole-plant tissue samples from 10 randomly-selected plants outside of the center of the plot for CC and separate from the DC yield strip were collected and analyzed for N with an Elementar Vario Max N/C Analyzer (Horneck & Miller, 1998). Rye P content was determined with a nitric acid and peroxide digest (Huang & Schulte, 1985) before analysis by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (Varian 730-ES; Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA). Rye regrowth and weeds were controlled with an application of glyphosate and 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (1.26 kg ae ha−1 glyphosate, 0.53 kg ae ha−1 2,4-D) 1 wk after DC harvest. Corn hybrids TA 583-22D (TA Seeds, Jersey Shore, PA; 108-d relative maturity) in 2017, and Seedway 5478GEN VT3P (Seedway, LLC, Hall, NY; 106-d relative maturity) in 2018 were planted on all treatments on 16 May 2017 and 25 May 2018 with a John Deere 1780 no-till planter (Deere & Company, Moline, IL) on 76-cm row spacing at a rate of 79,040 seeds ha−1. Corn is typically planted 1–2 wk after rye cover crop termination, but planting is often delayed due to excessive soil moisture or cold weather. Corn was planted for both treatments 15 d after DC harvest in 2017 and 16 d after DC harvest in 2018. Corn plant population was determined both years by counting the number of plants in a representative 3-m section per plot approximately 7 wk after planting. Corn was harvested for silage from two center rows on 29 September 2017 and 4 October 2018 with a front mounted Champion 1200 chopper (Maschinenfabrik KEMPER GmbH & Co, Stadtlohn, Germany). A representative 200-g sample was collected at the time of chopping with an integrated Hege sampler (Wintersteiger, Salt Lake City, UT). To assess the effect of the manure management on the forage quality of the rye silage, we simulated the process of dairy farms fermenting rye forage in silos to preserve the forage for feeding at a later date. To simulate silage production, 200-g rye DC subsamples from the harvested yield strip were dried to 60% moisture, vacuum-sealed in storage bags, and incubated at 30 °C for at least 3 wk (Tanjore, Ricchard, & Marshall, 2012) before forage analysis. Near infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) was completed with Foss NIRSystems Models XDS and 6500 with ISIScan v.4.6.1 (Eden Praire, MN). Forage samples were analyzed for crude protein (CP; Padmore, 1990), neutral detergent fiber (NDF; Padmore, 1990), and net energy of lactation (NEL; National Research Council, 1989). Total forage for DC treatment combinations was calculated by adding DC biomass to subsequent corn silage yields while total forage for CC treatment combinations was equal to subsequent corn silage yields. Fall and spring growing degree days (GDDs), base 4.4 °C (Mirsky, Curran, Mortenseny, Ryany, & Shumway, 2011), were calculated for rye. We conducted a partial budget analysis to determine if potential increases in rye biomass due to IM compared to BM could make up for the increased expense of IM. Fixed and variable prices were based on prices in the 2016–2017 and 2017–2018 Penn State Agronomy Guide (Harper, 2016, 2017). A survey of manure haulers in Pennsylvania (R. Meinen, personal communication, 2016) found that IM cost US$25 ha−1 more than BM. Average rye silage prices based on a Pennsylvania average feed price list that is gathered each month were communicated to us by a Penn State Extension Dairy Specialist (V. Ishler, personal communication, 2019). Data were analyzed with PROC MIXED in SAS 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). For analysis of rye biomass, ANR, APR, corn silage yield, total forage yield, ManM, RyeM, and their interaction (ManM × RyeM) were considered fixed effects; and year and block nested in year were considered random effects. The Satterthwaite approximation for degrees of freedom was used. To test our pre-planned hypothesis about the main effects of ManM and RyeM, we used the SLICE test of PROC MIXED which is an analysis of simple effects to partition the LSMEANS of interactions (ManM × RyeM) for rye biomass, ANR, APR, corn silage yield, and total forage yield analysis, and differences were considered significant when P <.05. For analysis of rye silage nutritive values (CP, NDF, and NEL) we could only compare the fixed effect of ManM, and year and block nested in year were considered random effects and differences were considered significant when P <.05. Publisher Copyright: © 2020 The Authors. Agronomy Journal © 2020 American Society of Agronomy
PY - 2020/7/1
Y1 - 2020/7/1
N2 - Double cropping forage cereal rye (Secale cereale L.) with corn (Zea mays L.) and injecting liquid dairy cow (Bos taurus L.) manure in the fall may increase manure nutrient utilization and total forage production. Although potentially economically and environmentally beneficial, these practices have not been widely adopted by Northeastern U.S. farmers. This 2-yr full-factorial experiment conducted in Pennsylvania quantified the effects of (a) rye management (RyeM; early terminated cover crop, CC vs. double crop harvested approximately 1 wk later, DC) and (b) manure application method (ManM; unincorporated broadcasted manure, BM vs. shallow disk injected manure, IM) on rye biomass, rye apparent manure nitrogen and phosphorus recovery (ANR and APR, respectively), subsequent corn silage yield, and total forage production (DC + summer corn silage) and the effect of ManM on DC forage nutritive value. Double cropping increased rye biomass 143%, ANR 119%, APR 126%, and total forage production 29–44% compared to CC. While IM did not increase net returns on rye silage production compared to BM, IM improved rye forage nutritive value by increasing ANR by 84%, rye crude protein by 29%, net energy of lactation by 10%, and reduced neutral detergent fiber (NDF) by 10%. Injecting manure also increased summer corn yield 21% and total forage 13% when rye was harvested as DC compared to DC with BM. Farmers adopting DC can increase total forage production and nutrient recovery and, when combined with IM, forage production and rye quality can potentially be improved.
AB - Double cropping forage cereal rye (Secale cereale L.) with corn (Zea mays L.) and injecting liquid dairy cow (Bos taurus L.) manure in the fall may increase manure nutrient utilization and total forage production. Although potentially economically and environmentally beneficial, these practices have not been widely adopted by Northeastern U.S. farmers. This 2-yr full-factorial experiment conducted in Pennsylvania quantified the effects of (a) rye management (RyeM; early terminated cover crop, CC vs. double crop harvested approximately 1 wk later, DC) and (b) manure application method (ManM; unincorporated broadcasted manure, BM vs. shallow disk injected manure, IM) on rye biomass, rye apparent manure nitrogen and phosphorus recovery (ANR and APR, respectively), subsequent corn silage yield, and total forage production (DC + summer corn silage) and the effect of ManM on DC forage nutritive value. Double cropping increased rye biomass 143%, ANR 119%, APR 126%, and total forage production 29–44% compared to CC. While IM did not increase net returns on rye silage production compared to BM, IM improved rye forage nutritive value by increasing ANR by 84%, rye crude protein by 29%, net energy of lactation by 10%, and reduced neutral detergent fiber (NDF) by 10%. Injecting manure also increased summer corn yield 21% and total forage 13% when rye was harvested as DC compared to DC with BM. Farmers adopting DC can increase total forage production and nutrient recovery and, when combined with IM, forage production and rye quality can potentially be improved.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85083805666&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85083805666&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/agj2.20181
DO - 10.1002/agj2.20181
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85083805666
SN - 0002-1962
VL - 112
SP - 2968
EP - 2977
JO - Agronomy Journal
JF - Agronomy Journal
IS - 4
ER -