Agronomy Journal 93:358-363 (2001)
© 2001 American Society of Agronomy
WASTE MANAGEMENT
Soybean Varietal Response to Liquid Swine Manure Application
John P. Schmidta,
John A. Lambb,
Michael A. Schmittb,
Gyles W. Randallc,
James H. Orfd and
Hero T. Gollanyb
a Dep. of Agronomy, Kansas State Univ., Manhattan, KS 66506
b Dep. of Soil, Water, and Climate, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
c Southern Res. and Outreach Center, Univ. of Minnesota, Waseca, MN 56093
d Dep. of Agronomy and Plant Genetics, Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108
Corresponding author (schmidt{at}ksu.edu)
 |
ABSTRACT
|
|---|
Applying manure to soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] as a routine management practice requires additional information about cultivar-dependent responses. Our objective was to determine seed yield, dry matter accumulation, N accumulation, and lodging responses for a cross-section of adapted public and private soybean cultivars when liquid swine (Sus scrofa) manure was applied. Field studies were conducted at seven locations in southern Minnesota during 1996 and 1997. Whole-plot treatments included three swine manure rates (zero, low, and high) injected with sweeps to a soil depth of 13 cm before planting. Split-plot treatments consisted of 12 public and private soybean cultivars. Average seed yield for all cultivars at three of seven locations was generally positive, increasing on average 1.4 kg kg-1 of applied available N. A significant manure rate x cultivar interaction was observed for lodging scores, but increased lodging was not related to any change in yield. Seed yield decreased with increasing manure rates at a seventh location, where there was a history of white mold [Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (lib.) d. By.] incidence. At this location, seed yield for the control was 0.20 Mg ha-1 greater than seed yield from either manure rate, and response to manure application was not the same for every cultivar. Except for this latter site, seed yield response to increasing manure rate was either favorable or innocuous, despite increased lodging. Manure application to soybean appears to be an acceptable management practice regardless of cultivar, except when the application exacerbated an already present disease pressure.
|
INTRODUCTION
|
|---|
IN RECENT YEARS, as the size of confined swine production facilities has increased there has not been a concomitant increase in the crop land area to which manure from these facilities is applied. Conventional wisdom dictates that manure should be applied to crops that utilize the N, and for most swine producers in the Upper Midwest this means manure applied for corn (Zea mays L.). Given that the common crop rotation on farms with a swine operation in this geographic region is corn–soybean, approximately half of the total acres of a farm should be in corn production any 1 yr and consequently available for manure applications. As the size of swine facilities increase, the potential for environmental risks associated with an over-application of manure for corn increases (Schmitt et al., 1996). To minimize these risks, producers must either obtain additional corn land area or consider an alternative crop to receive the manure.
Soybean requires considerable amounts of N to produce a crop, regardless of whether this N is fixed from the atmosphere or removed from the soil where it has been applied in the form of manure or fertilizer. In a recent survey of swine producers in Minnesota, only 13% of swine manure was applied to fields in which soybean was the subsequent crop (Schmitt et al., 1996). According to Varvel and Peterson (1992), soybean is a net N sink and can serve an environmental purpose by reducing N quantities in the soil, which ultimately reduces the amount of soil N available for leaching. The amount of N removed by soybean in a Nebraska study ranged between 150 and 200 kg N ha-1 (Varvel and Peterson, 1992). Shibles (1998) stated that annual demand for high-yielding soybean can be as great as 385 kg N ha-1. Schmidt et al. (2000) indicated that 200 kg N ha-1 accumulated in nonnodulating and nodulating isolines of the same soybean genotype by the R6 growth stage. Soybean should be considered a potential alternative crop for manure applications in the Upper Midwest.
Few reports exist in the literature on the effects of preplant manure applications on soybean production. Some of the agronomic concerns with applying manure for soybean include potential adverse effects on seed yield, lodging, and disease incidence. Wallace et al. (1991) reported that large midseason N fertilizer applications (150 kg N ha-1 at R1 to R5) caused soybean seed yield decreases on a taller indeterminate cultivar compared with a shorter determinate cultivar. The decrease was attributed to increased lodging caused by excessive vegetative growth from the N application and an increased incidence of white mold infection. Reese and Buss (1992) reported that small preplant N applications (28 kg N ha-1) did not affect lodging, while Bharati et al. (1986) found that large preplant N applications (up to 270 kg N ha-1) did cause lodging. Several other researchers have also reported that lodging can reduce yield (Weber, 1966; Cooper, 1971a, 1971b; Hoggard et al., 1978). In these studies, the factors attributed to observed lodging differences were cultivar, planting date, row spacing, and seeding rate. If lodging is a problem associated with manure application to soybean, then cultivar selection could affect yield responses to manure.
The direct effect of N on the growth response of a specific cultivar may be important. Lawn and Brun (1974) reported that two cultivars included in their study responded (increased seed yield) to N applied after the end of flowering. Wood et al. (1993) reported that seed yields were only affected in one of two cultivars studied, and the response was inconsistent. An 11.8% increase in seed yield was demonstrated at 6 of 8 site years when N was applied at the R3 growth stage (Wesley et al., 1998). Despite several studies indicating increased soybean yield or N accumulation with increasing N rates, the response has been inconsistent. Reports in the literature discussing cultivar interactions with preplant manure or N fertilizer applications were not found.
If manure application to soybean is to be adopted by producers, information on cultivar responses to applied manure is needed to increase the likelihood of sound agronomic and environmental decisions. The objective of this study was to determine seed yield, dry matter accumulation, N accumulation, and lodging responses for a cross-section of adapted public and private soybean cultivars when liquid swine manure was applied as a N source.
|
METHODOLOGY
|
|---|
Field studies were conducted at seven locations in southern Minnesota during 1996 and 1997. Soils at these sites developed from either loess or glacial till and are typical of the soybean production region of the Upper Midwest (Table 1). Soil test P and K levels from these sites were sufficient for optimum soybean growth (greater than levels that would warrant a P and K recommendation for soybean production in Minnesota; Rehm et al., 1995). Soil samples were collected in mid-June to determine soil NO3–N and NH4–N concentration. Within each plot, eight 30-cm soil cores (2.5 cm i.d.) were collected from within the center two rows. These samples were combined, dried, ground, and analyzed for NO3–N and NH4–N (Keeney and Nelson, 1982).
Whole-plot treatments included three manure rates (zero, low, and high) with split-plot treatments consisting of 12 individual soybean cultivars (Table 2). These 12 soybean cultivars were selected to represent the range in lodging and maturity potential for cultivars grown in southern Minnesota. All cultivars were capable of fixing N2. Nitrogen availability (Table 1) from the manure was estimated to be 65% of total N (Schmitt, 1995). Each subplot was 3 m wide (four rows, 76-cm spacing) by 9 m long. At each field location there were four blocks in a randomized complete block experimental design.
Liquid swine manure was applied using a plot-size applicator that was equipped with load cells, ground speed radar, and flow meter. This application method ensured accurate and repeatable manure rates and placement. Manure was injected with 43-cm wide sweep injectors spaced on 76-cm centers at an approximate depth of 13 cm, and applied either in the fall or spring before the growing season. Manure samples were collected at each location and analyzed for nutrient content. The previous crop at each site was corn.
Soybean was planted between 12 May and 3 June, which was typical for southern Minnesota. Aboveground plant samples were collected during the first week of September (before leaf drop) to estimate N uptake of the plants at the R6 growth stage (Iowa State Univ., 1985). Within each 4-row plot, two 76-cm lengths of row were collected from the middle two rows (between 20 and 100 cm from the end of the plot). These samples were weighed, dried, ground, and then analyzed for total Kjeldahl N. Lodging scores were obtained at maturity (R8 growth stage) and ranged from 1 (upright) to 5 (flat). White mold ratings were determined at the R6 growth stage and were based on a visual estimation of percent dead plants. Seed yield (adjusted to 13% moisture) was determined at physiological maturity by harvesting the middle two rows of the plot (end-trimmed to 8 m) using a small-plot combine.
Treatment effects were considered significant at the 10% probability level using an F test in PROC GLM (SAS Inst., 1988). An example analysis of variance is provided in Table 3, using error terms with location as a random variable as described by McIntosh (1983). Single-degree of freedom contrasts were used to evaluate the linear effects of manure rate and to compare the control with the nonzero manure rates.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 3. Example analysis of variance table for seed yield, aboveground biomass, N uptake, and lodging score at R6 for all seven locations
|
|
|
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
|
|---|
Soybean seed yield response to increasing manure rate was not the same for every cultivar at every location (Table 4). At three locations (Austin, Lamberton, and Waseca), seed yield increased with increasing manure rate for most of the cultivars—between 5 and 11 depending on the location (Fig. 1). Few positive responses were detected at Goodhue, Kasson, and Northrop (Fig. 1). Seed yield for the nonzero manure rates was greater than yield from the control for only two cultivars at Goodhue, while a linear response was observed for two other cultivars. At Kasson, seed yield increased with manure rate for three cultivars, but decreased with increasing manure rate for one cultivar. And at Northrop, a linear increase in seed yield with increasing manure rate was observed for only two cultivars. The responses at Lake Crystal could be distinguished as an individual category. Seed yield was adversely affected by increasing manure rate for six cultivars (Fig. 1). Although the three-way interaction between location, manure rate, and cultivar implies differences among cultivars, consistent trends for specific cultivars were difficult to determine. However, general trends were probably related to unique location characteristics.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table 4. Statistical analysis for seed yield, aboveground biomass, N uptake, and lodging score at R6 for all seven locations
|
|
View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1. Seed yield (n = 4) for 12 soybean cultivars for three manure rates and seven locations in southern Minnesota. *Indicates a significant difference between the two nonzero manure rates and the control, or a signficant linear effect of manure rate
|
|
Seed yield response to increasing manure rate was most favorable at the Austin, Lamberton, and Waseca locations. At Austin, yield increased linearly with increasing manure rate, and average yield for the nonzero manure rates was greater than yield from the control for all cultivars except `P9151' (Fig. 1). Similarly at Lamberton, yield increased with increasing manure rate for 8 of 12 cultivars. Cultivars that did not respond to the manure treatments included `Bert', `Parker', `IA 2008', and `P9151' (Fig. 1). The response to manure was similar at Waseca, although with a significant response for fewer cultivars as compared with Lamberton or Austin. Cultivars that responded favorably to the manure treatment at Waseca included `Bert', `Kato', `Leslie', `Parker', and `Archer' (Fig. 1). The unique feature observed for each of these locations, possibly contributing to the favorable seed yield response to increasing manure rate, was relatively low inorganic soil N concentration observed early in the growing season. At the Austin, Lamberton, and Waseca locations, available soil N (NO3–N and NH4–N, 0–30 cm depth) ranged from 13.6 to 14.3 mg kg-1 in mid-June (Table 1). In contrast, available soil N in mid-June was greater than 18.5 mg kg-1 for all other locations. Nitrogen provided by the manure may have compensated for the lower available soil N concentration at Austin, Lamberton, and Waseca, contributing to the predominantly favorable seed yield response to increasing manure rate at these three locations.
Seed yield response to manure at Goodhue, Kasson, and Northrop was not generally positive. However, seed yield was not negatively impacted, except for `IA2021' at Kasson. Fewer favorable seed yield responses to manure at these sites coincided with greater soil N concentration in mid-June. The inorganic soil N concentration ranged from 18.9 to 25.9 mg kg-1. Although increasing manure rate did not generally increase seed yield at these three locations, a single negative response observed for the 12 cultivars is probably an agronomically acceptable risk. Minimizing adverse environmental impacts of manure application without compromising soybean production potential should be a desirable strategy for producers with land constraints for swine production.
Soybean seed yield response at Lake Crystal can be contrasted to results obtained from the other six locations (Fig. 1). Seed yield was adversely affected by the manure treatments for six cultivars, including `A1900', `Sturdy', `Granite', `Archer', `Leslie', and `Kato'. For example, seed yield for `A1900' with the zero manure rate was 3.41 Mg ha-1, but yield decreased to 2.76 Mg ha-1 with the high manure rate. Although available soil N in mid-June was similar to the soil N concentration observed at Goodhue, Kasson, and Northrop, exceeding 20 mg kg-1, the incidence of white mold was greater than observed at any other location. Visual scores at Lake Crystal ranged up to 10% dead plants at R6, although a statistically significant relationship between these scores and specific cultivars could not be established (data not shown). Based on indigenous knowledge of the Lake Crystal field, a white mold history in soybean existed at this location. White mold was observed at only one other location, but visual scores did not exceed 4% for any of the plots. The divergent results from Lake Crystal could not be statistically attributed to a single factor. However, circumstantial evidence suggested that the less than favorable soybean response to manure application in this field was associated with white mold. Results from the Lake Crystal location support similar results by Wallace et al. (1991), in which decreased soybean yield was attributed to excess lodging and high incidence of white mold. These results illustrate that soybean cultivar selection can have a large impact with respect to manure application when white mold disease is present.
Soybean response was generally positively affected or unaffected by manure application at six of seven field locations in southern Minnesota. Although a significant interaction effect (cultivar x location x manure rate) was observed for seed yield response, average seed yield increased linearly with increasing manure rate for six locations (Table 5). When yield increase was expressed per unit of available N applied, the average yield increase observed at Austin, Lamberton, and Waseca ranged from 0.9 to 2.3 kg kg-1 of applied N (Table 5). A seed yield increase with increasing manure rates was also observed at Northrop, Goodhue, and Kasson, but average response did not reflect the predominant seed yield response observed at these locations; consequently, average response should not be considered the general response for all cultivars. In contrast, the average seed yield decrease with increasing manure rate observed at Lake Crystal was -0.5 kg kg-1 of applied N. Similar to the results observed at Northrop, Goodhue, and Kasson, a cultivar x manure rate interaction indicated that all cultivars did not respond the same.
Similar to general trends observed for seed yield responses, a linear increase in biomass at R6 with increasing manure rate was observed at four locations (Tables 4 and 5), increasing between 1.8 and 4.3 kg kg-1 of applied N for the Austin, Kasson, Lamberton, and Waseca locations. Biomass was unaffected by manure rate at the Northrop, Goodhue, and Lake Crystal locations.
An average increase in N uptake with increasing manure rate was observed regardless of location (Table 4), but an interaction among locations was not detected. Average amounts of N uptake for the zero, low, and high manure rates were 200, 215, and 219 kg N ha-1.
Because soil P and K levels were more than adequate at each field location, the favorable seed yield response to increasing manure rate was likely a response to the additional N supplied. These results support the somewhat inconsistent results presented in the literature. Allos and Bartholomew (1955), George and Singleton (1992), and Wesley et al. (1998) generally, but not always, observed a soybean seed yield increase with fertilizer N applications. Schmidt et al. (2000) did not observe any seed yield response with increasing N rates for the nodulating isoline evaluated in their study. The inconsistency in yield response to N among studies, or among locations within studies, may be a consequence of different levels of available soil N inherent to each field location. In this study, those locations with smaller amounts of available soil N in mid-June were those locations at which a positive response to manure application was observed for a greater number of cultivars. Manure is a unique source of N that supplies available N throughout the growing season. As a consequence of continual N mineralization, the slow release of N appeared to be beneficial, or at minimum innocuous, to soybean seed yield, regardless of cultivar at those locations without a high incidence of white mold.
The only consistently negative agronomic response, regardless of location and cultivar, was the linear increase in lodging with increasing manure rate. However, there was a significant cultivar x manure interaction (Table 4), indicating that for some cultivars the addition of manure had a greater impact on lodging than for other cultivars (Table 6). For example, the lodging scores for cultivar `IA2021' ranged from 2.1 to 2.4 (an increase of 0.0003 kg-1 of applied N), while the lodging scores for the soybean cultivar `IA2008' ranged from 2.3 to 3.1 (an increase of 0.0025 kg-1 of applied N). The responses observed for these two cultivars represented the extreme ranges in lodging score increases with manure rate (Table 6). Although the rate of increased lodging with increasing manure rate was variable, absolute lodging scores should also be considered. For example, the lodging score increase for `A1900' was one of the greatest observed (0.0021 kg-1 of applied N), yet the score observed at the high manure rate (2.5) was less than the lodging score observed for `Parker' (3.0) with the zero manure rate. Despite the increase in lodging scores (supporting results by Weber, 1966; Cooper, 1971a, 1971b; Hoggard et al., 1978), the overall seed yield response of soybean to manure application provides the final economic evaluation for the producer. Generally, seed yield increased, or remained constant, with increasing manure rates despite a coincidental increase in lodging scores. This was the general observation for six of the seven field locations (excluding Lake Crystal).
|
SUMMARY
|
|---|
Average soybean seed yield at three of seven field locations in southern Minnesota increased linearly with increasing manure rate (avg. 1.4 kg kg-1 of applied N), despite a coincidental increase in lodging. Although this was the general response at these three locations, cultivars responded differently to the manure application. Depending on the location, seed yield for several (between one and seven) cultivars was unaffected by the manure application. This generally favorable response coincided with lower available soil N observed at these locations in mid-June. At three other field locations, the seed yield response to manure application was essentially innocuous, although a few cultivars at each location responded favorably (increased yield) to increasing manure rate. At a 7th field location, a field that had a history of high incidence of white mold, seed yield for six cultivars was adversely affected by the manure application. For the other six cultivars, a difference in seed yield was not observed with increasing manure rate. Except for observations from Lake Crystal, soybean response to manure application was generally favorable or innocuous.
Soybean response to applied manure in a field with a history of white mold was generally unfavorable. Our advice to soybean producers, based on the results of this study and a review of the literature, is to avoid applying manure to soybean in fields with a history of white mold disease. Besides this specific problem, increased lodging was the only other adverse consequence of manure application. Some cultivars responded to increasing manure rate with greater increases in lodging compared with other cultivars. Cultivars that are less likely to lodge would probably be more acceptable to producers interested in applying manure to soybean, even though a corresponding difference in yield was not observed. For field locations in which the soil N concentration was relatively low in mid-June, the seed yield response was generally favorable for many of the cultivars evaluated in this study, suggesting that increased yield was obtained with the additional N supplied in the manure. The inconsistency in positive yield response to the manure application, similar to other studies in which N fertilizer had been applied to soybean, suggests a potential for improving our ability to identify those fields in which additional N would improve soybean seed yield.
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
|---|
We thank Andy Scobbie, Phil Schaus, and Jeff Vetsch for their assistance with this project. Appreciation is also given to National Research Initiative's Water Resources Assessment and Protection Grants Program, Award no. 95-37102-2176, for primary financial support. Additional support was provided through a grant from the Minnesota Soybean Research and Promotion Council.
|
NOTES
|
|---|
Minnesota Agric. Exp. Stn. Scientific J. Series Pap. no. 001250005.
Received for publication July 7, 1999.
|
REFERENCES
|
|---|
- Allos, H.F., and W.V. Bartholomew. 1955. Effect of available nitrogen on symbiotic fixation. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 19:182–184.
- Bharati, M.P., D.K. Whigham, and R.D. Voss. 1986. Soybean response to tillage and nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium fertilization. Agron. J. 78:947–950.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Cooper, R.L. 1971a. Influence of early lodging on yield of soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]. Agron. J. 63:449–450.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Cooper, R.L. 1971b. Influence of soybean production practices on lodging and seed yield in highly productive environments. Agron. J. 63:490–493.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- George, T., and P.W. Singleton. 1992. Nitrogen assimilation traits and dinitrogen fixation in soybean and common bean. Agron. J. 84: 1020–1028.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Hoggard, A.L., J.G. Shanon, and D.R. Johnson. 1978. Effect of plant population on yield and height characteristics in determinate soybeans. Agron. J. 70:1070–1072.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Iowa State University of Science and Technology. 1985. How a soybean develops. Spec. Rep. 53. Iowa State Univ. Coop. Ext. Service, Ames, IA.
- Keeney, D.R., and D.W. Nelson. 1982. Nitrogen—inorganic forms. p. 643–698. In A.L. Page et al. (ed.) Methods of soil analysis. Part 2. Agron. Monogr. 9, ASA, Madison, WI.
- Lawn, R.J., and W.A. Brun. 1974. Symbiotic nitrogen fixation in soybeans: III. Effect of supplemental nitrogen and intervarietal grafting. Crop. Sci. 14:22–25.
- McIntosh, M.S. 1983. Analysis of combined experiments. Agron. J. 75:153–155.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Reese, Jr., P.F., and G.R. Buss. 1992. Response of dryland soybeans to nitrogen in full-season and doublecrop systems. J. Prod. Agric. 5:528–531.
- Rehm, G.W., M.A. Schmitt, and R. Munter. 1995. Fertilizer recommendations for agronomic crop in Minnesota. Ext. Ser. B4-6220-E. Univ. of Minnesota, St. Paul.
- SAS Institute. 1988. SAS/STAT® user's guide. Release 6.03 ed. SAS Inst., Cary, NC.
- Schmidt, J.P., M.A. Schmitt, G.W. Randall, J.A. Lamb, J.H. Orf, and H.T. Gollany. 2000. Swine manure application to nodulating and nonnodulating soybean. Agron. J. 92:987–992.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Schmitt, M.A. 1995. Manure management in Minnesota. FO-3553. Univ. of Minn. Ext. Service, St. Paul, MN.
- Schmitt, M.A., D.R. Schmidt, and L.D. Jacobson. 1996. A manure management survey of Minnesota swine producers: Effect of farm size on manure application. App. Eng. Agric. 12:595–599.
- Shibles, R.M. 1998. Soybean nitrogen acquisition and utilization. p. 5–11. In Proc. of the 28th North Central Extension–Industry Soil Fertility Conf., St. Louis, MO. 11–12 Nov. 1998. Potash and Phosphate Inst., Brookings, SD.
- Varvel, G.E., and T.A. Peterson. 1992. Nitrogen fertilizer recovery by soybean in monoculture and rotation systems. Agron. J. 84:215–218.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Wallace, S.U., R. Glanchet, A. Bouniols, and N. Gelfi. 1991. Influence of nitrogen fertilization on morphological development of indeterminate and determinate soybeans. J. Plant Nutr. 13:1523–1537.
- Weber, C.R. 1966. Nodulating and nonnodulating soybean isolines: II. Response to applied nitrogen and modified soil conditions. Agron. J. 58:46–49.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Wesley, T.L., R.E. Lamond, V.L. Martin, and S.R. Duncan. 1998. Effects of late-season nitrogen fertilizer on irrigated soybean yield and composition. J. Prod. Agric. 11:331–336.
- Wood, C.W., H.A. Torbert, and D.B. Weaver. 1993. Nitrogen fertilizer effects on soybean growth, yield, and seed composition. J. Prod. Agric. 6:354–360.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
G. M. McAndrews, M. Liebman, C. A. Cambardella, and T. L. Richard
Residual Effects of Composted and Fresh Solid Swine (Sus scrofa L.) Manure on Soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] Growth and Yield
Agron. J.,
June 5, 2006;
98(4):
873 - 882.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Adeli, K. R. Sistani, D. E. Rowe, and H. Tewolde
Effects of Broiler Litter on Soybean Production and Soil Nitrogen and Phosphorus Concentrations
Agron. J.,
January 1, 2005;
97(1):
314 - 321.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. E. Brink, D. E. Rowe, K. R. Sistani, and A. Adeli
Bermudagrass Cultivar Response to Swine Effluent Application
Agron. J.,
May 1, 2003;
95(3):
597 - 601.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
