2000
DOI: 10.1080/00288233.2000.9513415
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Calculating nitrogen leaching losses and critical nitrogen application rates in dairy pasture systems using a semi‐empirical model

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
77
1
3

Year Published

2000
2000
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 88 publications
(81 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
77
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the total annual NO 3 --N leaching loss under the urine patch from the present study (85 kg N ha -1 yr-1 ) was much smaller than that from the Lismore soil reported earlier (516 kg N ha -1 yr-1 ), largely because the Templeton soil used in the present study has a deeper soil profile and thus a greater water retention capacity compared with the Lismore soil (Di & Cameron 2002c). Because NO 3 -leached in a grazed pasture soil is derived predominantly from animal urine patches (Ledgard et al 1999;Silva et al 1999;Di & Cameron 2000,2002bDi et al 2002;Monaghan et al 2002), a significant reduction in NO 3 -leaching from the urine patches would effectively reduce the overall NO 3 -leaching losses from a grazed pasture system.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the total annual NO 3 --N leaching loss under the urine patch from the present study (85 kg N ha -1 yr-1 ) was much smaller than that from the Lismore soil reported earlier (516 kg N ha -1 yr-1 ), largely because the Templeton soil used in the present study has a deeper soil profile and thus a greater water retention capacity compared with the Lismore soil (Di & Cameron 2002c). Because NO 3 -leached in a grazed pasture soil is derived predominantly from animal urine patches (Ledgard et al 1999;Silva et al 1999;Di & Cameron 2000,2002bDi et al 2002;Monaghan et al 2002), a significant reduction in NO 3 -leaching from the urine patches would effectively reduce the overall NO 3 -leaching losses from a grazed pasture system.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, if the stocking rate is 3 dairy cows ha -1 , the area covered by urine patches is c. 25% of the paddock per year. Therefore annual NO3 --N leaching losses from a grazed paddock should be calculated on the basis of the areas that are covered by urine and non-urine patch areas (Di & Cameron 2000). For instance, if the NO 3 --N leaching loss is 77 kg N ha -1 yr -1 from the urine patch areas and 1.5 kg N ha -1 yr -1 from the non-urine patch areas (Control, assuming no other N was applied) (Table 3), then the average NO3 --N leaching loss from the grazed paddock is estimated to be 20.4 kg N ha -1 yr -1 .…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In intensively grazed dairy pasture systems, although the amount of NO3--N leached is affected by inputs of N fertilisers and organic waste effluents (Scholefield et al 1993;Di et al 1998aDi et al ,b, 1999Ledgard et al 1999a;Silva et al 1999;Monaghan et al 2000), the largest contribution comes from the N returned from the animal urine (Ball et al 1979;Ryden et al 1984;Field et al 1985;Silva et al 1999;Di & Cameron 2000, 2002b. In a grazed pasture, between 60-90% of the N ingested by the grazing animal is returned to the pasture in the urine and dung and more than 70% of the N returned is in the urine (Haynes & Williams 1993;Jarvis et al 1995).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the absence of data comparing organic farming systems and conventional systems in New Zealand we have used two recently published nutrient budget models, OVERSEER™ for P, K, and S (Ledgard et al 1999), and a more precise model, the nitrogen from leaching estimation (NLE) model (Di & Cameron 2000), for N leaching losses from dairy pasture systems.…”
Section: Nutrient Budget Models and Simulationsmentioning
confidence: 99%