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 ISI Web of Science (5) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Misselbrook, T. H. Articles by McCrory, D. F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Misselbrook, T. H. Articles by McCrory, D. F. Agricola Articles by Misselbrook, T. H. Articles by McCrory, D. F. Related Collections Animal Waste Nutrient Management Air Pollution Nitrogen

Crusting of Stored Dairy Slurry to Abate Ammonia Emissions

Pilot-Scale Studies

^a Institute of Grassland and Environmental Research, North Wyke, Okehampton, Devon EX20 2SB, UK
^b ADAS, Woodthorne, Wergs Road, Wolverhampton WV6 8TQ, UK
^c Silsoe Research Institute, Wrest Park, Silsoe, Bedfordshire MK45 4HS, UK
^d USDA-ARS, Dairy Forage Research Center, University of Wisconsin, 1925 Linden Drive West, Madison, WI 53706

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of pilot-scale slurry store with adapted cover for measurement of ammonia emissions.

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Influence of bedding type (Experiment 1) on crust formation. Error bars indicate ±1 standard error of the mean (n = 4).

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Influence of slurry dry matter (DM) content (Experiment 2) on (a) crust thickness, (b) ammonia emission rate (g NH3–N m–2 d–1), and (c) normalized emission rate (% initial total ammoniacal nitrogen [TANi] m–2 d–1). Error bars indicate ±1 standard error of the mean (n = 4).

View larger version (30K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Influence of slurry dry matter (DM) content (Experiment 3) on (a) crust formation, (b) ammonia emission rate (g NH3–N m–2 d–1), and (c) normalized emission rate (% initial total ammoniacal nitrogen [TANi] m–2 d–1). Error bars indicate ±1 standard error of the mean (n = 3).

View larger version (24K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Influence of air flow rate (Experiment 4) on (a) crust formation and (b) ammonia emission rate (g NH3–N m–2 d–1). Error bars indicate ±1 standard error of the mean (n = 4).

View larger version (24K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Influence of cattle diet and rainfall (Experiment 5) on (a) crust formation and (b) ammonia emission rate (g NH3–N m–2 d–1). Error bars indicate ±1 standard error of the mean (n = 3). CDC, corn, dry crust; CWC, corn, wet crust; CDWC, corn, dry then rewetted crust; GDC, grass, dry crust.

View larger version (20K): [in a new window]   Fig. 7. Influence of a starch and glucose additive on ammonia emission rate (g NH3–N m–2 d–1). Error bars indicate ±1 standard error of the mean (n = 3).

View larger version (99K): [in a new window]   Fig. 8. Crust formation on (a) control, (b) high-starch, and (c) low-starch treatments, each after 27 d of storage. Tank dimensions: 0.75-m height, 1.0-m diameter, 500-L slurry volume. Differences can be seen between the watery thin "skin" in (a), the more significantly developed crust in (b), and the substantial "pie-crust" development in (c).