Management of Turkey and Swine Manure Derived
Nitrogen in
a Sugar Beet Cropping System
John A. Lamb and Michael A. Schmitt
Dept. of Soil, Water, and Climate, University
of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN.
Mark Bredehoeft, Steve Roehl, and John Fischer
Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar Cooperative, Renville, MN.
Justification of Research:
Livestock
operations, mainly poultry and swine, are increasing in size and impact in the Southern
Minnesota sugar beet growing area. Many sugar
beet producers own or have interest in these operations; thus have manure available to use
on their fields. Manure research data
concludes that manure has a positive effect on crop production from its effects on soil
nutrient availability and soil physical properties. A
concern has been raised about the effect of late season nitrogen mineralized from the
manure on sugar beet quality. Grower
observations indicate better growth in manured fields.
With the large amount of manure available the question has changed from whether to
use manure but when in the sugar beet crop rotation should manure be applied to minimize
quality concerns and realize benefits. The
answer to this question maybe different depending on the type of manure. Poultry manure has a considerable amount of litter
in it compared to swine manure, thus slowing initial release of poultry manure-N.
Little recent
information is available on the effect of manure on sugar beet root yield and quality. Halvorson and Hartman (1974) reported that sucrose
concentration and recoverable sugar per acre were reduced with the addition of beef manure
while root yield was increased. Schmitt et
al. (1996) reported that swine manure mineralization occurs several years after
application in a legume-corn rotation. Malzer
and Graff (1995) reported that leached nitrate-N during second year after an application
of turkey manure was greater than in the first year after application. This data suggests that poultry manure has a
latter or more extended release of N when compared to liquid swine manure.
The
implications of the manure-N release are critical, especially to sugar beet growers. Therefore, recommendations need to be evaluated
with sugar beets. This research project has
been designed to: 1) measure the effect of manure application effects on sugar beet root
yield and quality compared to fertilizer N applications; 2) determine the effect of turkey
and swine manure mineralization differences on sugar beet root yield and quality; and 3)
develop management strategies for manure application in a sugar beet rotation.
Materials and Methods:
To address
the objectives, two experiments were conducted in 1999 at a location near Renville,
Minnesota. Experiment 1 was established after
soybean was grown in a soybean-corn-sugar beet rotation.
The treatments listed in Table 1 were designed to evaluate the effect of manure
applied one cropping year before sugar beet is grown and compare its nitrogen contribution
to fertilizer applied the year of sugar beet production.
In the corn year (1999) the plots used for the N rate evaluation in the sugar beet
year were fertilized with a recommended rate of fertilizer for optimum corn production. Deep nitrate-N soil samples were taken from the
check plots Fall 1998 before manure and fertilizer application, April 1999 before
planting, May 28, 1999. Nitrate-N and
ammonium-N soil samples were taken monthly to a depth of one foot to characterize the N
dynamics during the growing season. Basal
stalk samples for nitrate concentration were taken at physiological maturity (black
layer). Corn grain was hand harvested from
each plot. After corn harvest, soil samples
to a 4 foot depth were taken and analyzed for residual nitrate-N from every plot.
Table 1.
Treatments for Experiment 1.
Treatment
Treatment number
Year 1 (corn 1999)
Year
2 (sugar beet 2000)
1
120 lb N/A
0 lb N/A (check)
2
120 lb N/A
40 lb N/A
3
120 lb N/A
80 lb N/A
4 120
lb N/A
120 lb N/A
5
120 lb N/A
160 lb N/A
6
120 lb N/A
200 lb N/A
7
Swine
manure 2500 gal/A (228 lb total N/A) Residual
8
Swine manure 5000 gal/A (455 lb total
N/A) Residual
9
Turkey manure 5 tons/A (90 lb total N/A)
Residual
10 Turkey
manure 10 tons/A (180 lb total N/A) Residual
11
Check (no fertilizer or manure)
Check (no fertilizer or manure)
Table 2. Treatments for Experiment 2.
Treatment number
Treatment
1
0 lb N/A
(check)
2
40 lb N/A
3 80
lb N/A
4
120 lb N/A
5
160 lb N/A
6
200 lb N/A
7
Swine manure 2500 gal/A (228 lb total N/A)
8
Swine manure 5000 gal/A (455 lb total N/A)
9
Turkey manure 2.5 tons/A (45 lb total N/A)
10
Turkey manure 5.0 tons/A (90 lb total N/A)
Results and Discussion:
Experiment 1 - The initial soil
nitrate-N measured Fall 1998 was 30 pounds per acre for the 0 to 2 foot depth and 11
pounds per acre for the 2 to 4 foot depth. The
only data available at the time of this report was the corn grain yield (Table 3). There was a significant increase in grain yield
when compared to the check with the application of fertilizer and manure. There were no significant differences in grain
yield between the fertilizer treatment and the manure treatments. The only significant difference was between the
grain yields for the two rates of swine manure (155 vs 169 bushels per acre). The first year of this experiment was the set
up year to investigate the effects of manure on sugar beet production two years after
application. Sugar beet will be grown at this
site next year.
Table 3. Corn grain yields at 15.5% moisture or Experiment
1 at Renville in 1999.
Treatment Corn
grain yield
- - - - bu/A - - - -
Check
126
Fertilizer - 120 lb. N/A
158
Swine Manure 2500
gallon/A
155
Swine Manure 5000
gallon/A
169
Turkey Manure 5 tons/A
166
Turkey Manure 10 tons/A
167
LSD 0.05 12
Experiment 2 - Fall 1998 soil
nitrate-N was 27 pounds per acre in the 0 to 2 foot depth and 18 pounds per acre in the 2
to 4 foot depth. Root yield was not
significantly affected by the nitrogen fertilizer applications (Table 4). Only the root yields of the 5 ton per acre turkey
manure and 5000 gallons per acre swine manure applications were significantly greater than
the root yield of the check. The loss to
molasses for the 5 ton per acre turkey manure application was significantly greater than
the check. No significant differences
occurred for sucrose concentration, recoverable sucrose per ton, and recoverable sucrose
per acre.
Table 4. Root yield, sucrose concentration, loss to
molasses, recoverable sucrose per ton, and recoverable sucrose
per acre for Experiment 2 at Renville in 1999.
Root
Sucrose
Loss to
Recoverable
Treatment
Yield Concentration
Molasses
Sucrose
ton/A
%
%
lb/ton
lb/A
Check
23.9
18.3
0.93
348
8301
Fertilizer 40 lb N/A
24.9
18.2
1.01
345
8570
Fertilizer 80 lb N/A
25.3
18.1
0.94
342
8634
Fertilizer 120 lb N/A
25.7
17.5
0.86
332
8546
Fertilizer 160 lb N/A
26.1
17.4
0.98
329
8492
Fertilizer 200 lb N/A
24.2
17.6
1.03
331
8033
Swine Manure 2500 gal/A
25.3
17.5
1.00
329
8353
Swine Manure 5000 gal/A
28.0
17.5
0.94
330
9371
Turkey Manure 2.5 ton/A
26.2
17.8
0.93
337
8849
Turkey Manure 5.0 ton/A
27.3
17.3
1.10
323
8819
LSD 0.05
2.6
NS
0.10
NS
NS
Literature Cited:
Halvorson, A.D., and G.P. Hartman.
1974. Longtime influence of organic and
inorganic nitrogen sources and rates on sugarbeet yield and quality. In 1974 Sugarbeet Research and Extension
Reports p. 77-79.
Malzer, G.L., and T. Graff. 1995. Impact of turkey manure application on corn
production and potential water quality concerns Westport, MN 1994. In Field Research in Soil Science 1995.
Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station Misc. Pub. 88-1995. p. 121-125.
Schmitt, M.A., C.C. Sheaffer, and G.W.
Randall. 1996. Preplant manure on alfalfa:
Residual effects on corn yield and soil nitrate. J.
Prod. Agric. 9:395-398.