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 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 (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Grande, J. D. Articles by Powell, J. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Grande, J. D. Articles by Powell, J. M. Agricola Articles by Grande, J. D. Articles by Powell, J. M. Related Collections Water Quality Surface Water Quality Soil Erosion Best Management Practices Runoff Animal Waste

Residue Level and Manure Application Timing Effects on Runoff and Sediment Losses

^a Biological Systems Engineering Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706
^b USDA-ARS, Dairy Forage Research Center, Madison, WI 53706

View larger version (38K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Arrangement of treatment plots showing details of microplot location.

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Effect of crop residue cover (%) on runoff depth for three manure treatments. Data points are an average of four replicates from each of the four seasons. Residue cover ranges for the three harvesting schemes (G, grain; SH, high-cut silage; SL, low-cut silage) are highlighted. For clarity, confidence intervals were not plotted.

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Effect of crop residue cover (%) on sediment concentration for three manure treatments. Data points are an average of four replicates from each of the four seasons. Residue cover ranges for the three harvesting schemes (G, grain; SH, high-cut silage; SL, low-cut silage) are highlighted. For clarity, confidence intervals were not plotted.

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Effect of crop residue cover (%) on sediment load in runoff for three manure treatments. Data points are an average of four replicates from each of the four seasons. Residue cover ranges for the three harvesting schemes (G, grain; SH, high-cut silage; SL, low-cut silage) are highlighted. For clarity, confidence intervals were not plotted.

View larger version (38K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Particle size distribution of sediments for nine treatments (G, grain; SH, high-cut silage; SL, low-cut silage; N, no manure; F, fall manure; S, spring manure). Each bar represents a composite distribution of 10 to 16 replicates, based on the number of available samples, averaged over the four seasons.

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Fig. 6. Effect of manure application timing and harvesting method (G, grain; SH, high-cut silage; SL, low-cut silage) on enrichment ratios of the (a) clay-sized and (b) sand-sized fractions. Data points are an average of 9 to 16 replicates with samples from each of the four seasons.