JEQ Grow Your Career With ASA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (62)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Withers, P. J.A.
Right arrow Articles by Breeze, V. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Withers, P. J.A.
Right arrow Articles by Breeze, V. G.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Withers, P. J.A.
Right arrow Articles by Breeze, V. G.
Related Collections
Right arrow Surface Water Quality
Right arrow Nutrient Management
Right arrow Animal Waste
Right arrow Municipal Waste
Journal of Environmental Quality 30:180-188 (2001)
© 2001 American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America

TECHNICAL REPORT
SURFACE WATER QUALITY

Phosphorus Transfer in Runoff Following Application of Fertilizer, Manure, and Sewage Sludge

Paul J.A. Withersa, Stephen D. Clayb and Victor G. Breezec

a ADAS Bridgets, Martyr Worthy, Winchester SO21 1AP, UK
b Severn Trent Water Limited, Process Engineering, Alpha House, Warwick Technology Park, Heathcote Road, Warwick CV34 6DA, UK
c ADAS Rosemaund, Preston Wynne, Hereford HR1 3PG, UK

Corresponding author (paul.withers{at}adas.co.uk)

Received for publication November 30, 1999.

   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Phosphorus (P) transfer in surface runoff from field plots receiving either no P, triplesuperphoshate (TSP), liquid cattle manure (LCS), liquid anaerobically digested sludge (LDS), or dewatered sludge cake (DSC) was compared over a 2-yr period. Dissolved inorganic P concentrations in runoff increased from 0.1 to 0.2 mg L-1 on control and sludge-treated plots to 3.8 and 6.5 mg L-1 following application of LCS and TSP, respectively, to a cereal crop in spring. When incorporated into the soil in autumn, runoff dissolved P concentrations were typically <0.5 mg L-1 across all plots, and particulate P remained the dominant P form. When surface-applied in autumn to a consolidated seedbed, direct loss of LCS and LDS increased both runoff volume and P transfers, but release of dissolved P occurred only from LCS. The largest P concentrations (>70 mg L-1) were recorded following TSP application without any increase in runoff volume, while application of bulky DSC significantly reduced total P transfers by 70% compared with the control due to a reduced runoff volume. Treatment effects in each monitoring period were most pronounced in the first runoff event. Differences in the release of P from the different P sources were related to the amounts of P extracted by either water or sodium bicarbonate in the order TSP > LCS > LDS > DSC. The results suggest there is a lower risk of P transfer in land runoff following application of sludge compared with other agricultural P amendments at similar P rates.

Abbreviations: DSC, dewatered sludge cake • DUP, dissolved unreactive phosphorus • LCS, liquid cattle manure • LDS, liquid digested sludge • MRP, molybdate-reactive phosphorus • PP, particulate phosphorus • TDP, total dissolved P • TP, total phosphorus • TSP, triplesuperphosphate


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
INORGANIC P fertilizers and livestock manures are routinely applied to agricultural land to meet crop P requirements, boost soil P fertility, or to avoid manure storage. Alternative sources of P, such as sewage sludge, have also become more available and their application to land is forecast to expand in some regions as other routes of disposal become increasingly restricted (Davies, 1996). The resulting build-up of soil P fertility has given farmers greater flexibility in the rate and timing of these different P amendments. For example, a significant number of UK farmers now topdress P fertilizer to the growing crop in order to save time at drilling. These topdressings often supply the P requirements of all or part of the crop rotation rather than the specific requirement of the crop being grown. Farmers are also encouraged to apply manures to growing crops in spring to help maximize manure N utilization and reduce N leaching losses associated with incorporation prior to sowing in autumn (Smith and Chambers, 1993).

These trends might be considered to have increased the risk of incidental P transfer in surface and/or subsurface runoff in rural watersheds, causing eutrophication (Haygarth and Jarvis, 1999). Although of no agronomic or financial consequence to the farmer, nonpoint P loads in runoff can become a readily available P source to aquatic biota. Manures and sludges are of particular concern because they are increasingly applied to limited land areas and result in an excess loading of P to the soil when application rates are based on crop N requirements, particularly for sewage sludges, which tend to have a lower N to P ratio than manures (Sharpley et al., 1998). Land application of sewage sludge may therefore increase nonpoint P transfers compared with other P amendments, especially at high application rates and/or under conditions of high runoff potential (Kirkham, 1982; Melanen et al., 1985; Mostaghimi et al., 1988).

Control over such incidental P losses requires an understanding of the conditions under, and time periods over, which losses occur and the processes involved. Differences in P transfer to water following application of P amendments might be expected depending on the type of material applied (McLeod and Hegg, 1984; Bushee et al., 1998), the rate and timing of application (Edwards and Daniel, 1993; Smith et al., 1998), the frequency and/or timing of rainfall events after application (Sharpley, 1997), the method employed (Mueller et al., 1984), or the prescence of a buffer zone (Heathman et al., 1995). Measurements of P transfer rates in land runoff from experimental plots receiving manures have therefore been shown to be very variable (Sharpley et al., 1998; Khaleel et al., 1980). Differences in P transfer have been mostly related to site conditions and effects on runoff volumes, rather than to inherent differences in the relative P availabilities of the materials applied. For example, data presented by Frossard et al. (1996) suggest differences in the P availability of different types of sewage sludge, depending on sludge treatment, which might affect their potential for P release in storm runoff. If such differences exist, which is supported by limited experimental data (McLeod and Hegg, 1984; Melanen et al., 1985), this may influence the types of P amendments, or application rates, used in different areas.

This paper reports on a field experiment that compared the transfers of P in surface runoff from field plots amended with inorganic fertilizer, cattle manure, and sewage sludge, and the extent to which differences in P transfer could be accounted for by differences in the P availability of the materials applied as estimated in the laboratory.


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Site Establishment and Sample Collection
Fifteen adjacent experimental plots were established during February 1995 on a south-facing, 5° slope of a field at ADAS Rosemaund, Herefordshire, UK (Grid Reference SO554486). The silty clay loam soil (Argillic Albaqualf) is developed over Old Red Sandstone and disperses readily during heavy rain. The site is representative of well-managed, fertile arable land within the surrounding area and receives an average annual rainfall of 787 mm yr-1. The initial concentration of Olsen-extractable P in the soil ranged from 16 to 25 mg L-1. The plots measured 2 m wide and 16 m long and were hydrologically isolated by a gravel trench at the upslope perimeter and by 110-mm smooth-bore, nonperforated, plastic pipe laid along the length of each plot. The interface of the pipe with the soil was sealed with bentonite to prevent surface runoff entering adjacent plots. Surface runoff was collected in 110-mm gutter pipe located at the end of each plot and fed by connecting pipes into a plastic reception tank. After each significant storm event, the runoff volume was measured and, after thorough stirring, a 250-mL subsample was taken for determination of P content. Runoff was collected mostly from storm events giving 10 to 15 mm or more of rain over a 24- to 48-h period (Fig. 1) . The collection tanks were emptied after each event.



View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1. Monitored runoff events (indicated by down arrows) in relation to daily rainfall during (a) Period 1, (b) Period 2, (c) Period 3, and (d) Period 4 following treatment application. Runoff volumes (L plot-1) collected from control plots for each event are also shown

 
Treatments and Experimental Design
The experiment compared inorganic P fertilizer applied as TSP, LCS, LDS, and DSC, with a control receiving no P. Both sludges had undergone primary filtering and secondary biological treatment prior to either anaerobic digestion (LDS) or dewatering (DSC), and were representative of sludges recycled to land in the UK. All materials were obtained from the same source each year, except that a second source of DSC was applied in autumn 1996. The range in chemical composition of the organic amendments is given in Table 1.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Mean and range in nutrient composition of the manure treatments, and the proportions of manure total P extracted by water, sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3), sodium hydroxide (NaOH), and hydrochloric acid (HCl). Values are means of three replicates except for dry solids (DS) and total P, which are means of five replicates

 
The treatments were arranged in a randomized block design with three replicates and applied by hand at rates that were intended to supply comparable amounts of P as determined by preliminary analysis of test samples taken before the treatments were applied. The P rates were chosen to represent up to the maximum recommended in the UK under the Code of Good Agricultural Practice for the Protection of Water (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, 1998), which is equivalent to 250 kg ha-1 of N. Actual rates applied were calculated from analysis results of samples taken at the time of application, and sometimes differed from the target rates due to variation in the chemical composition of the materials applied and difficulties in handling them (Table 2). Plots receiving solid P amendments (TSP and DSC) tended to receive more P than plots receiving liquid materials (LCS and LDS). Overall, the TSP, LCS, LDS, and DSC treatments supplied 330, 186, 150, and 329 kg P ha-1, respectively. All plots were cropped to cereals each year and received similar amounts of agrochemicals (other than P), and were managed in the same manner as the rest of the field.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Treatment application details, monitoring dates, and number of storm events sampled during each test period

 
Runoff Monitoring Program
Two runoff events were monitored before treatments were applied to ensure uniformity of runoff volumes between plots. Thereafter, storm runoff was collected during four monitoring test periods (Periods 1–4) following treatment application (Table 2). In April 1995, the treatments were surface-applied to a growing crop of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) at the tillering stage (Period 1). For the second monitoring period, the treatments were incorporated into the surface 20 cm of soil with a rotavator before sowing with winter wheat in December 1995. Each plot was plowed before treatment application. The treatments were applied again in late May 1996 (except LCS and LDS, which were applied on 3 June 1996) when the crop was at the stem extension stage (Period 3). For the fourth monitoring period, the treatments were applied in November 1996 to the surface of a seedbed that had been prepared after conventional plowing and tine cultivation, sown with winter barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), and subsequently rolled. Application rates of the liquid treatments in this last test period had to be reduced to avoid direct runoff losses from the consolidated surface left by rolling (Table 2). The winter barley crop did not extablish well following treatment application and the site was plowed-under in March 1997, and resown to spring barley. Three storm events were monitored after plowing to test for any residual soil effects from the cumulative build-up of soil P, as measured in soil samples taken from each plot after the crop was harvested in 1997.

Analytical Methods
Runoff samples collected after each storm event were analyzed for dissolved molybdate-reactive phosphorus (MRP), total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), and total phosphorus (TP). Total P was determined by inductively coupled plasma–optical emission spectroscopy (ICP–OES) after nitric and hydrochloric acid (aqua regia) digestion. Dissolved fractions (MRP and TDP) were determined after filtering through a 0.45-µm millipore filter, MRP was determined colorimetrically according to the method of Murphy and Riley (1962), and TDP was determined directly by ICP–OES. Total dissolved P concentrations were generally well above the 100 µg L-1 detection limit of ICP–OES suggested by Rowland and Haygarth (1997). The difference between TP and TDP was assumed to be particulate phosphorus (PP), and that between MRP and TDP was termed dissolved unreactive phosphorus (DUP) and assumed to be largely of organic origin. The amounts of inorganic P extracted from the organic amendments by distilled water, 0.5 M NaHCO3, 0.1 M NaOH, and 1 M HCl were determined colorimetrically following a nonsequential adaptation of the method of Hedley et al. (1982). Water-soluble P in the soil was determined colorimetrically at a 1:10 soil to solution ratio. Soil test P was determined by the method of Olsen et al. (1954) and total P in soil by ICP–OES following aqua regia digestion.

Data Handling
Treatment effects on mean values of measured parameters were determined by analysis of variance techniques (Genstat 5 Committee, 1993). Data values for Period 4 were logarithmically transformed prior to Genstat analysis. Treatment effects on cumulative P loads assumed that the monitoring periods were independent of each other; this assumption was based on the fact that all plots were plowed to 20 to 25 cm between periods and the lack of any effect of residual soil P build-up on P concentrations in runoff at the end of the experiment. To allow better comparison between treatments, the amounts of P collected over each monitoring period were adjusted according to the total runoff volume and reported as volume-adjusted (flow-weighted) concentrations. Valid treatment comparisons were restricted to the first, second, and fourth monitoring periods, since there was only one event comparing all treatments during the third monitoring period and this event occurred very late in the growing season.


   RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 
Manure Analysis
Laboratory analysis revealed large differences in the amounts of P extracted from the organic amendments by water, NaHCO3, and HCl, while differences in NaOH-extractable P were relatively small (Table 1). Water and NaHCO3 extracted considerably more P from the cattle manure than from the sludges, while HCl-soluble P was greater in the liquid amendments (LCS and LDS) than in the two solid DSC samples. The high P solubility of LCS in both NaHCO3 and HCl indicates a dominance of inorganic forms, while the large amounts of P extracted by water (60% of total P) suggest this material has potential for rapid P release in storm runoff. Although the P in the liquid sludge was also largely soluble in HCl, the proportions extracted by NaHCO3 (35% of total P) and water (<10% of total P) were noticeably lower than for the cattle manure, especially for water-soluble P. In contrast, the dewatered sludges were only partially soluble in HCl, contained little NaHCO3–extractable P (<15% of total P), and virtually no water-soluble P (<=1% of total P). The latter is probably due to the removal of soluble P forms in the sludge during the dewatering process. Differences in P solubility between the sludges and the cattle manure may be due to differences in the proportions of sparingly soluble calcium phosphate compounds present (Sommers et al., 1976; Hinedi et al., 1989; Frossard et al., 1996). Since TSP is >95% soluble in water, the relative differences in the potential P release to runoff can be expected to be in the order TSP > LCS > LDS > DSC.

First Monitoring Period
The first storm event producing runoff was recorded on 18 May, 3 wk after treatment application. During this event, the amounts of total P collected from plots receiving TSP and LCS were significantly (P < 0.05) greater than those from plots receiving no P, LDS, or DSC. This contrasts strongly with the amounts of P collected in plot runoff prior to treatment application, which were relatively uniform across all plots (Fig. 2) . These large treatment effects were due to an increase in the concentrations of dissolved (<0.45 µm) P in the runoff rather than to an increase in particulate P concentrations (Fig. 3) . For example, average MRP concentrations of 0.14, 6.49, 3.77, 0.21, and 0.20 mg L-1 were recorded from plots receiving no P, TSP, LCS, LDS, or DSC, respectively. There were no treatment effects on DUP concentrations that were <0.1 mg L-1. Consequently, TDP represented 81 and 65% of TP loads (mg plot-1) collected on TSP- and LCS-treated plots, respectively, but remained close to 30% on other plots, including those receiving sewage sludge.



View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2. Cumulative loss of total phosphorus (TP) in relation to cumulative runoff before and after treatment application in Period 1. The down arrow represents the date of treatment application. TSP, triplesuperphosphate; LCS, liquid cow manure; LDS, liquid digested sludge; DSC, dewatered sludge cake

 


View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3. Concentrations of total dissolved phosphorus (TDP) and particulate phosphorus (PP) in runoff collected in the first three storm events following treatment application in Period 1. Error bars indicate least significant difference, P < 0.05. C, control; TSP, triplesuperphosphate; LCS, liquid cow manure; LDS, liquid digested sludge; DSC, dewatered sludge cake

 
Concentrations of dissolved P in the two subsequent runoff events in May remained elevated on TSP- and LCS-treated plots, averaging close to 1 mg L-1 compared with values of ca. 0.3 mg L-1 on other plots (Fig. 3). However, the differences in MRP concentrations were much smaller than observed in the first event, and treatment effects on runoff TP loads were significant at only the 10% level. This is demonstrated by a return to a shallower gradient of cumulative P loss after the first storm event (Fig. 2). Following a prolonged period with very little rain, a further heavy storm on 7 August generated a small amount of P-rich runoff from all plots, including the control (average 3 L plot-1). For example, TDP concentrations averaged 8.7 mg L-1, and accounted for 77% of TP concentrations. This event therefore had a strong influence on cumulative P transfer over the monitoring period (Fig. 2) and suggests that the P amendments were no longer contributing P in runoff.

The cumulative amounts of total P collected over the first three storm events were threefold higher than the control following TSP and LCS application, while amounts of TDP collected from these two treatments were 12-fold higher than the control (Table 3). Total amounts of P collected from sludge-treated plots were not significantly different from the control. Cumulative differences between treatments were not related to differences in runoff volumes, which were generally very uniform across all plots. Runoff volumes collected from TSP-treated plots were slightly lower than for other treatments during the first two events (Fig. 2), but not significantly so (P > 0.05). Comparison of volume-adjusted P concentrations confirmed the lack of any significant release of P from the sludge materials (Table 3), which was consistent with the differences in potential P release measured in the laboratory. Similar relative differences in runoff P between sludge, manure, and inorganic fertilizer were observed by McLeod and Hegg (1984). The application rate of TSP used was typical of what might be applied on commercial farms in the UK as a topdressing to match crop P requirements over part of a crop rotation, and the LCS loading rate was well within recommended limits (Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, 1998). Such practices clearly represent a potential eutrophication hazard in riparian areas, especially in view of the high dissolved P component of the runoff.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 3. Treatment effects on cumulative total dissolved phosphorus (TDP) and particulate phosphorus (PP) loads, flow-weighted total phosphorus (TP) concentrations, and the proportion occurring in dissolved form for Periods 1, 2, and 4. Values in Period 1 cover the first three events only, values in Period 4 are log-10 transformed

 
Second Monitoring Period
Compared with the very high concentrations recorded in Period 1, average runoff TP concentrations recorded during the second monitoring period were uniformly low (0.6–0.8 mg L-1). Total amounts of P collected also fell within the relatively narrow range of 102 to 135 mg plot-1 (Table 3, Fig. 4) due to incorporation of the treatments before sowing. However, in the first runoff event, which again occurred 3 wk after treatment application, six- and eightfold greater dissolved P concentrations were recorded on plots receiving TSP and LCS, respectively, while runoff P concentrations on LDS plots were also increased threefold, compared with both the untreated control and the DSC-treated plots (Table 4). Dissolved P concentrations on treated plots remained slightly elevated in subsequent events, especially on plots receiving TSP and LCS, and during the larger storms, but these tended not to be statistically significant (P > 0.05). Concentrations of DUP remained low during this monitoring period (<0.1 mg L-1). Cumulative amounts of TDP collected in runoff over the eight events monitored, and the volume-adjusted concentrations of TDP, were significantly larger than the control following TSP and LCS application (Table 3). Smaller increases in TDP transfers from plots receiving liquid sludge were not significant, except when expressed as a proportion of total P. Application of the dewatered sludge did not increase dissolved P transfer.



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4. Cumulative loss of total phosphorus (TP) in relation to cumulative runoff after treatment application in Period 2. TSP, triplesuperphosphate; LCS, liquid cow manure; LDS, liquid digested sludge; DSC, dewatered sludge cake

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 4. Treatment effects on runoff volume and total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), particulate phosphorus (PP), and total phosphorus (TP) concentrations in the first runoff event following incorporation (Period 2) or surface application (Period 4). Values in Period 4 are log-10 transformed

 
Particulate P remained the dominant form transported from all plots during this period and the increases in TDP concentrations were not sufficient to cause a significant (P < 0.05) treatment effect on TP concentrations or loads (Table 3). As in the first monitoring period, there was no statistically significant effect of the P treatments on either runoff volumes or on PP concentrations in the runoff. The main treatment effect was, therefore, to slightly increase the proportion of the loss occurring in dissolved form, particularly in the first runoff event (Table 4). The notable lack of any increase in dissolved P concentrations following application of DSC, despite the very large rate of P applied compared with other treatments (Table 2), confirms the low water solubility of P in this sludge found by laboratory analysis. As reported by Dunnigan and Dick (1980), incorporation of the P amendments effectively reduced P transfers compared with surface application, and minimized any differences in potential P release to runoff between the different treatments applied. However, other work has shown that, in the absence of any crop cover, or under more extreme rainfall intensities, the soil disturbance caused by incorporation may also increase P transfers due to accelerated transport of soil particles (Mostaghimi et al., 1992).

Third Monitoring Period
Although 11 mm of rain fell the day after surface application of the TSP and DSC treatments on 22 May 1996, concentrations of MRP, TDP, and TP were similar across all plots, averaging 1.1, 1.3, and 2.6 mg L-1, respectively. Only on one TSP-treated plot was an excessively large TDP concentration measured (25 mg L-1). Little rain fell after the application of the liquid treatments (3 June) until 12 August. Runoff volumes and P concentrations during this latter event were similar across all plots, with TDP accounting for 62% of the total P transfer. Runoff TDP and TP concentrations averaged 4.8 and 6.9 mg L-1, respectively, and were as large as those found in August runoff during the first monitoring period, despite the greater volume of runoff collected (17 L plot-1). These large concentrations may be due to a P mineralization effect of rain on dry soils (Magid and Nielsen, 1992) and/or the prescence of senescing crop tissue (Schreiber and McDowell, 1985).

Fourth Monitoring Period
Lower rainfall intensities were needed to generate plot runoff during the fourth monitoring period than during earlier periods (Fig. 1) due to the consolidated nature of the soil surface before treatment application. Also, in contrast to other monitoring periods, there was a significant (P < 0.01) treatment effect on the amount of runoff collected both during individual storm events, and cumulatively over the whole monitoring period (Fig. 5) . In the first runoff event, which occurred within a few days of application, plots receiving liquid amendments, especially LCS, generated significantly more runoff, and plots receiving DSC generated less runoff, than plots receiving either no P or TSP (Table 4). The increased runoff volumes were due to a direct loss of manure and sludge from the consolidated surface left by rolling, and resulted in large increases in concentrations of both dissolved and particulate P. For example, MRP concentrations increased from 0.7 mg L-1 on control plots to 74, 9, and 3 mg L-1 on TSP-, LCS-, and LDS-treated plots, respectively (Table 4). Dissolved unreactive P concentrations were also elevated after TSP and LCS application. The very high amounts of dissolved P collected from TSP-treated plots were obtained without any increase in surface runoff. Treatment differences in P transfer were maintained for approximately 1 mo after application (data not shown).



View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig. 5. Cumulative loss of total phosphorus (TP) in relation to cumulative runoff after treatment application in Period 4. TSP, triplesuperphosphate; LCS, liquid cow manure; LDS, liquid digested sludge; DSC, dewatered sludge cake. Note the logarithmic scale

 
Cumulative TDP and PP loads in runoff over the whole monitoring period were all enhanced following TSP, LCS, and LDS application, and PP loads were reduced following DSC application (Table 3). However, comparison of volume-adjusted P concentrations indicated that while there was a large release of dissolved P from the TSP and LCS, the proportion of total P transfer occurring in dissolved form following LDS or DSC application was not increased. Once again, the results indicate a poor or negligible release of dissolved P from the sludges, and the differences in P transfer between the two sludges and the control were largely due to differences in runoff volume and PP transfer, and not due to any significant release of dissolved P in the runoff (Table 3). Beneficial reductions in runoff and PP transfer following application of high dry matter sludge have been reported previously (Kladivko and Nelson, 1979; Deizman et al., 1989).

Residual Effects
In the period directly after plowing and reseeding in spring 1997, there was no significant (P < 0.05) treatment effect on either runoff volume or the P content of the runoff. Total dissolved P concentrations were slightly elevated on TSP- and DSC-treated plots (1.9 and 1.8 mg L-1, respectively) compared with other plots (0.9–1.3 mg L-1) in the first runoff event after plowing, but this was significant only at the 10% level (data not shown). These plots had received the most P and showed higher concentrations of total P in the soil at the end of the experiment (Table 5). In the two subsequent events, runoff P concentrations were similar across all plots.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 5. Treatment effects on the amounts of water-soluble, Olsen-extractable, and total P in the topsoil at the end of the experiment

 
All treatments increased both water-soluble and Olsen-extractable P concentrations in the soil compared with the control, but the increase was much larger on TSP-treated plots (Table 5). There was no difference in water- or Olsen-extractable P between the manure and sludge treatments despite the differences in total P input and in their laboratory-determined potential P availabilities (Table 1). Expressed as a proportion of the increase in soil total P, the amounts of P recovered in Olsen-extractable form were 28, 15, 18, and 9% for TSP, LCS, LDS, and DSC, respectively, and the amounts of P recovered in water-extractable form were 10, 5, 4, and 3% for TSP, LCS, LDS, and DSC, respectively. The results suggest that a large proportion of the water- and sodium bicarbonate-extractable P in LCS had accumulated in a more slowly exchangeable form in the soil. This may be related to the amounts of Ca applied in the different P sources (Sharpley et al., 1998). The lower recovery of P in DSC compared with TSP is consistent with its low solubility in water and sodium bicarbonate.


   CONCLUSIONS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
 
A comparison of the release of P in surface runoff following application of different P amendments to a dispersive silty clay loam soil has indicated that the risk of P transfer to watercourses from agricultural land amended with liquid and dewatered sewage sludge is less than when amended with either inorganic P fertilizer or liquid cattle manure, due to their lower P solubility in water and/or sodium bicarbonate. The amounts of inorganic P fertilizer used in this experiment were chosen to represent large single-dose applications to meet the P requirements of part (Period 1) or all (other periods) of a crop rotation, and to be comparable with the P rates applied in other amendments. The results show that large fertilizer topdressings to the soil surface represent a significant eutrophication risk. However, fertilizer application rates to meet the P requirements of an individual crop would be lower than N-driven manure or sludge P loading rates, and P release in runoff would be expected to be correspondingly lower than with organic amendments. The differences in P solubility between the organic amendments were not apparent in soil test P analysis.

The main effect of the P amendments was to increase dissolved inorganic P concentrations in runoff and this was most pronounced in the first runoff event following application. The extent of the increase was dependent not only on the type of P amendment applied, but also the time and method of application. Substantial release of P in runoff occurred when P amendments were applied to the soil surface, especially where the latter was consolidated by rolling after seedbed preparation and sowing. Under these conditions, application of bulky sludges reduced runoff and particulate P loss compared with the control. The lowest P release in runoff occurred when the P amendments were incorporated into the soil, although this may reduce flexibility in the timing of P applications and increase the risk of N losses by leaching. This practice may also lead to increased erosional P transfers at other sites depending on the degree of surface protection provided and rainfall intensity.


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
This experiment formed part of a research project on the environmental impact of sewage sludge application to agricultural land funded by the UK Water Industry Research Limited.


   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSIONS
 REFERENCES
 




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
A. R. Buda, P. J.A. Kleinman, M.S. Srinivasan, R. B. Bryant, and G. W. Feyereisen
Effects of Hydrology and Field Management on Phosphorus Transport in Surface Runoff
J. Environ. Qual., October 29, 2009; 38(6): 2273 - 2284.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Agron. J.Home page
A. K. Obour, M. L. Silveira, M.B. Adjei, J. M. Vendramini, and J. E. Rechcigl
Cattle Manure Application Strategies Effects on Bahiagrass Yield, Nutritive Value, and Phosphorus Recovery
Agron. J., September 1, 2009; 101(5): 1099 - 1107.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
P. M. Haygarth, H. ApSimon, M. Betson, D. Harris, R. Hodgkinson, and P. J. A. Withers
Mitigating Diffuse Phosphorus Transfer from Agriculture According to Cost and Efficiency
J. Environ. Qual., August 24, 2009; 38(5): 2012 - 2022.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
P. A. Vadas, L. W. Good, P. A. Moore Jr., and N. Widman
Estimating Phosphorus Loss in Runoff from Manure and Fertilizer for a Phosphorus Loss Quantification Tool
J. Environ. Qual., June 23, 2009; 38(4): 1645 - 1653.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
U. P. P. Pillai, V. Manoharan, A. Lisle, X. Li, and W. Bryden
Phytase Supplemented Poultry Diets Affect Soluble Phosphorus and Nitrogen in Manure and Manure-amended Soil
J. Environ. Qual., June 23, 2009; 38(4): 1700 - 1708.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
N. Gottschall, M. Edwards, E. Topp, P. Bolton, M. Payne, W. E. Curnoe, B. B. Coelho, and D. R. Lapen
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Bacteria Tile and Groundwater Quality Following Direct Injection of Dewatered Municipal Biosolids into Soil
J. Environ. Qual., May 1, 2009; 38(3): 1066 - 1075.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
M. C. Smith, J. W. White, and F. J. Coale
Evaluation of Phosphorus Source Coefficients as Predictors of Runoff Phosphorus Concentrations
J. Environ. Qual., February 6, 2009; 38(2): 587 - 597.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
J. Uusi-Kamppa and H. Heinonen-Tanski
Evaluating Slurry Broadcasting and Injection to Ley for Phosphorus Losses and Fecal Microorganisms in Surface Runoff
J. Environ. Qual., October 23, 2008; 37(6): 2339 - 2350.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
X.-L. Huang, Y. Chen, and M. Shenker
Chemical Fractionation of Phosphorus in Stabilized Biosolids
J. Environ. Qual., August 8, 2008; 37(5): 1949 - 1958.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
D. J. Wagner, H. A. Elliott, R. C. Brandt, and D. Jaiswal
Managing Biosolids Runoff Phosphorus Using Buffer Strips Enhanced with Drinking Water Treatment Residuals
J. Environ. Qual., June 23, 2008; 37(4): 1567 - 1574.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
B. L. Allen and A. P. Mallarino
Effect of Liquid Swine Manure Rate, Incorporation, and Timing of Rainfall on Phosphorus Loss with Surface Runoff
J. Environ. Qual., January 4, 2008; 37(1): 125 - 137.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
L. R.F. Alleoni, S. R. Brinton, and G. A. O'Connor
Runoff and Leachate Losses of Phosphorus in a Sandy Spodosol Amended with Biosolids
J. Environ. Qual., January 4, 2008; 37(1): 259 - 265.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
N. E. Hansen, D. M. Vietor, C. L. Munster, R. H. White, and T. L. Provin
Runoff Water Quality from Turfgrass Established Using Volume-Based Composted Municipal Biosolids Applications
J. Environ. Qual., May 25, 2007; 36(4): 1013 - 1020.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
C. A. Volf, G. R. Ontkean, D. R. Bennett, D. S. Chanasyk, and J. J. Miller
Phosphorus Losses in Simulated Rainfall Runoff from Manured Soils of Alberta
J. Environ. Qual., April 5, 2007; 36(3): 730 - 741.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Soil Sci.Home page
A. L. Shober and J. T. Sims
Integrating Phosphorus Source and Soil Properties into Risk Assessments for Phosphorus Loss
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., March 12, 2007; 71(2): 551 - 560.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
X.-L. Huang, Y. Chen, and M. Shenker
Solid Phosphorus Phase in Aluminum- and Iron-Treated Biosolids
J. Environ. Qual., March 1, 2007; 36(2): 549 - 556.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
F. Shigaki, A. Sharpley, and L. I. Prochnow
Source-Related Transport of Phosphorus in Surface Runoff
J. Environ. Qual., October 27, 2006; 35(6): 2229 - 2235.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
H. A. Elliott, R. C. Brandt, and G. A. O'Connor
Runoff Phosphorus Losses from Surface-Applied Biosolids
J. Environ. Qual., August 9, 2005; 34(5): 1632 - 1639.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Soil Sci.Home page
P. J. A. Kleinman, A. M. Wolf, A. N. Sharpley, D. B. Beegle, and L. S. Saporito
Survey of Water-Extractable Phosphorus in Livestock Manures
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., April 11, 2005; 69(3): 701 - 708.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
G. A. O'Connor, H. A. Elliott, N. T. Basta, R. K. Bastian, G. M. Pierzynski, R. C. Sims, and J. E. Smith Jr.
Sustainable Land Application: An Overview
J. Environ. Qual., January 1, 2005; 34(1): 7 - 17.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
G. M. Pierzynski and K. A. Gehl
Plant Nutrient Issues for Sustainable Land Application
J. Environ. Qual., January 1, 2005; 34(1): 18 - 28.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
M. R. Hart, B. F. Quin, and M. L. Nguyen
Phosphorus Runoff from Agricultural Land and Direct Fertilizer Effects: A Review
J. Environ. Qual., November 1, 2004; 33(6): 1954 - 1972.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
W. J. Dougherty, N. K. Fleming, J. W. Cox, and D. J. Chittleborough
Phosphorus Transfer in Surface Runoff from Intensive Pasture Systems at Various Scales: A Review
J. Environ. Qual., November 1, 2004; 33(6): 1973 - 1988.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
X.-L. Huang and M. Shenker
Water-Soluble and Solid-State Speciation of Phosphorus in Stabilized Sewage Sludge
J. Environ. Qual., September 1, 2004; 33(5): 1895 - 1903.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
C. J. Penn, G. L. Mullins, L. W. Zelazny, J. G. Warren, and J. M. McGrath
Surface Runoff Losses of Phosphorus from Virginia Soils Amended with Turkey Manure Using Phytase and High Available Phosphorus Corn Diets
J. Environ. Qual., July 1, 2004; 33(4): 1431 - 1439.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
I. C. Daverede, A. N. Kravchenko, R. G. Hoeft, E. D. Nafziger, D. G. Bullock, J. J. Warren, and L. C. Gonzini
Phosphorus Runoff from Incorporated and Surface-Applied Liquid Swine Manure and Phosphorus Fertilizer
J. Environ. Qual., July 1, 2004; 33(4): 1535 - 1544.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
P. A. Vadas, P. J. A. Kleinman, and A. N. Sharpley
A Simple Method to Predict Dissolved Phosphorus in Runoff from Surface-Applied Manures
J. Environ. Qual., March 1, 2004; 33(2): 749 - 756.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
A. L. Shober and J. T. Sims
Phosphorus Restrictions for Land Application of Biosolids: Current Status and Future Trends
J. Environ. Qual., November 1, 2003; 32(6): 1955 - 1964.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
T. W. Andraski, L. G. Bundy, and K. C. Kilian
Manure History and Long-Term Tillage Effects on Soil Properties and Phosphorus Losses in Runoff
J. Environ. Qual., September 1, 2003; 32(5): 1782 - 1789.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
H. Tabbara
Phosphorus Loss to Runoff Water Twenty-Four Hours after Application of Liquid Swine Manure or Fertilizer
J. Environ. Qual., May 1, 2003; 32(3): 1044 - 1052.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
P. J. A. Kleinman, A. N. Sharpley, B. G. Moyer, and G. F. Elwinger
Effect of Mineral and Manure Phosphorus Sources on Runoff Phosphorus
J. Environ. Qual., November 1, 2002; 31(6): 2026 - 2033.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
C. J. Penn and J. T. Sims
Phosphorus Forms in Biosolids-Amended Soils and Losses in Runoff: Effects of Wastewater Treatment Process
J. Environ. Qual., July 1, 2002; 31(4): 1349 - 1361.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Environ. Qual.Home page
H. A. Elliott, G. A. O'Connor, and S. Brinton
Phosphorus Leaching from Biosolids-Amended Sandy Soils
J. Environ. Qual., March 1, 2002; 31(2): 681 - 689.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (62)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Withers, P. J.A.
Right arrow Articles by Breeze, V. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Withers, P. J.A.
Right arrow Articles by Breeze, V. G.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Withers, P. J.A.
Right arrow Articles by Breeze, V. G.
Related Collections
Right arrow Surface Water Quality
Right arrow Nutrient Management
Right arrow Animal Waste
Right arrow Municipal Waste

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Agronomy Journal Crop Science
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education		 Vadose Zone Journal
Soil Science Society of America Journal Journal of Plant Registrations The Plant Genome