HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Related articles in JEQ Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (17) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Daverede, I. C. Articles by Gonzini, L. C. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Daverede, I. C. Articles by Gonzini, L. C. Agricola Articles by Daverede, I. C. Articles by Gonzini, L. C. Related Collections Soil Erosion Phosphorus Runoff Water Pollution Animal Waste

Phosphorus Runoff from Incorporated and Surface-Applied Liquid Swine Manure and Phosphorus Fertilizer

^a Department of Crop Sciences, 1102 South Goodwin Avenue, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
^b Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824-1325

View larger version (29K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Mean monthly rainfall and air temperature measured at the Northwestern Illinois Agricultural Research and Demonstration Center, Monmouth, IL, from May 1999 to May 2001.

View larger version (27K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Mean dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) concentration in runoff as affected by time of rainfall simulation (one [1MO] and six months [6MO] after P amendment application); P source (control, TSP = 54 kg P ha–1 as triple superphosphate, LM = low swine manure rate, and HM = high swine manure rate); and application method (surface-applied and incorporated, where the control and TSP were chisel-plowed, and LM and HM were injected). Mean values (n = 16) that have the same letters are not significantly different (P < 0.1) as determined by the Scheffé test.

View larger version (28K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Mean dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) load in runoff as affected by time of rainfall simulation (one [1MO] and six months [6MO] after P amendment application); P source (control, TSP = 54 kg P ha–1 as triple superphosphate, LM = low swine manure rate, and HM = high swine manure rate); and application method (surface-applied and incorporated, where the control and TSP were chisel-plowed, and LM and HM were injected). Mean values (n = 16) that have the same letters are not significantly different (P < 0.1) as determined by the Scheffé test.

View larger version (23K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Relationship between runoff dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP) concentration and Bray P1 soil extraction values for incorporated treatments (chisel-plowed control, TSP = chisel-plowed 54 kg P ha–1 as triple superphosphate, LM = injected low swine manure rate, HM = injected high swine manure rate).

View larger version (29K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Mean total phosphorus (TP) concentration in runoff as affected by time of rainfall simulation (one [1MO] and six months [6MO] after P amendment application); P source (control, TSP = 54 kg P ha–1 as triple superphosphate, LM = low swine manure rate, and HM = high swine manure rate); and application method (surface-applied and incorporated, where the control and TSP were chisel-plowed, and LM and HM were injected). Mean values (n = 16) that have the same letters are not significantly different (P < 0.1) as determined by the Scheffé test.

View larger version (27K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Mean total phosphorus (TP) load in runoff as affected by time of rainfall simulation (one [1MO] and six months [6MO] after P amendment application); P source (control, TSP = 54 kg P ha–1 as triple superphosphate, LM = low swine manure rate, and HM = high swine manure rate); and application method (surface-applied and incorporated, where the control and TSP were chisel-plowed, and LM and HM were injected). Mean values (n = 16) that have the same letters are not significantly different (P < 0.1) as determined by the Scheffé test.

View larger version (80K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Relationship between total phosphorus (TP) concentrations in runoff from incorporated treatments (including control), sediment (SED) concentration in runoff, and Bray P1 (B1) soil extraction value. TP concentration = 0.0025B1 + 0.571SED; R2 = 0.91, P = 0.001.

View larger version (64K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Relationship between total phosphorus (TP) load in runoff from incorporated treatments (including control), sediment (SED) load in runoff, and Bray P1 (B1) soil extraction value. TP load = 0.114B1 + 0.456SED; R2 = 0.72, P = 0.001.

View larger version (82K): [in a new window]   Fig. 9. Relationship between algal-available phosphorus (AAP) concentrations in runoff from incorporated treatments (including control), sediment (SED) concentration in runoff, and Bray P1 (B1) soil extraction value. AAP concentration = 0.0018B1 + 0.016SED + 0.00017B1 x SED; R2 = 0.85, P = 0.001.

View larger version (82K): [in a new window]   Fig. 10. Relationship between algal-available phosphorus (AAP) load in runoff from incorporated treatments (including control), sediment (SED) load in runoff, and Bray P1 soil extraction (B1) value. AAP load = 0.041B1 + 0.056SED + 0.00043B1 x SED; R2 = 0.80, P = 0.001.