Nitrogen balances at the crop and farm-gate scale in livestock farms in Italy

Bassanino, Monica; Grignani, Carlo; Sacco, Dario; Allisiardi, E.

doi:10.1016/j.agee.2007.01.023

Cited by 62 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The NUE index value for the whole crop rotation indicates that, yearly, the above-ground biomass crop absorbed only 49% of the total amount of N, originating from A (atmospheric deposition), F (mineral and organic fertilizers), R (plant root additions). Likewise, Bassanino et al [34] and Demurtas et al [31] obtained NUE values ranging between 47% and 50% in similar climatic and agronomic conditions with cattle livestock. In particular, for the considered cropping system, the Italian ryegrass had a much lower efficiency than silage corn in converting N input into crop N biomass.…”

Section: Nitrogen Balance and Nitrogen Use Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Models, when properly validated, provide a fast and cost-effective way of estimating NO 3 -N leaching under different agricultural management practices. Another frequently used approach to quantify N use efficiency at various scales is the N balance [32][33][34][35], widely recognized as a powerful tool employed by policy-makers for raising farmers' awareness of their current management practices [20,34] and to support sustainable farming planning [17,36] at field [37], farm-gate [38] or territorial scale [39].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing Nitrogen Use Efficiency and Nitrogen Loss in a Forage-Based System Using a Modeling Approach

Piccini¹,

Bene²,

Farina³

et al. 2016

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In intensive agriculture, N supply often exceeds crop requirements, even in nitrate vulnerable zones (NVZ). In farmland, the N surplus gives rise to NO 3´l eaching and consequent groundwater pollution. The present study aimed at proposing measures to reduce N leaching and hence improve N efficiency in a buffalo livestock farm located in the NVZ of Latina plain (Central Italy). The farm was cultivated with forage crops in a double annual crop rotation: Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum Lam.) in winter and silage corn (Zea mays L.) in summer. Mineral and organic fertilizers were supplied to both crops. The annual N budget and soil solution NO 3 -N concentrations were evaluated using a modeling approach. The performance of the WinEPIC model in simulating the response of the NO 3 -N concentration in percolation to the N application rate was assessed and validated by field measurements of the NO 3 -N concentration in the soil solution. Three scenarios were proposed to identify the best practice to minimize the environmental impact of N application without significant yield loss. Also, recommendations of best practices in N fertilization and animal manure spreading were given. This study thus provides useful preliminary information for decision-making in agriculture/environmental policies.

show abstract

Section: Nitrogen Balance and Nitrogen Use Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Nitrogen Use Efficiency and Nitrogen Loss in a Forage-Based System Using a Modeling Approach

Piccini¹,

Bene²,

Farina³

et al. 2016

Agronomy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our data revealed that the rotation R1, in combination with FYM lead to high N and P surplus, that are likely to determine undesired nutrients losses in the surrounding ecosystems. However, the highest N surplus value, 321 kg ha -1 year -1 , calculated for the combination R1 with N1, are not surprising because it falls in the range of 300 to 338 kg N ha -1 year -1 reported for dairy farms in the Po valley (Grignani et al, 2003;Bassanino et al 2007). Compared to the intensive annual rotation R1, the rotation R6 is certainly more equilibrated, due to the lower load of animals per unit land, and also to the presence of alfalfa, that provide N which is fixed locally, instead of being imported from external arable land in the form of feed concentrates.…”

Section: Nutrients Balancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of integrated forage rotation and manure management on yield, nutrient balance and soil organic matter

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports results from a field experiment established in 1995 and still on going. It is located in Lodi, in the irrigated lowlands of Lombardy, Northern Italy. The experiment compares two rotations: the annual double cropping system, Italian ryegrass + silage maize (R1); and the 6-year rotation, in which three years of double crop Italian ryegrass + silage maize are followed by three years of alfalfa harvested for hay (R6). Each rotation have received two types of dairy manure: i) farmyard manure (FYM); ii) semi-liquid manure (SLM). The intent was to apply to each unit land area the excreta produced by the number of adult dairy cows sustained, in terms of net energy, by the forage produced in each rotation, corresponding to about 6 adult cows ha -1 for R1 and 4 adult cows ha -1 for R6. Manure was applied with (N1) or without (N0) an extra supply of mineral nitrogen (N) in the form of urea. The objectives of this study were: i) to assess whether the recycling of two types of manure in two forage rotation systems can sustain crop yields in the medium and long term without additional N fertilization; ii) to evaluate the nutrient balance of these integrated forage rotations and manure management systems; iii) to compare the effects of farmyard manure and semi-liquid manure on soil organic matter. The application of FYM, compared to SLM, increased yield of silage maize by 19% and alfalfa by 23%, while Italian ryegrass was not influenced by the manure treatment. Yet, silage maize produced 6% more in rotation R6 compared to rotation R1. The mineral nitrogen fertilization increased yield of Italian ryegrass by 11% and of silage maize by 10%. Alfalfa, not directly fertilized with mineral nitrogen, was not influenced by the nitrogen applied to the other crops in rotation. The application of FYM, compared to SLM, increased soil organic matter (SOM) by +37 % for the rotation R1, and by +20% for the rotation R6. Conversely, no significant difference on SOM was observed between R1 and R6 with the application of SLM. However, the maize stover used for composting FYM was produced by crops not included in the rotations R1 and R6, consequently the increase of soil carbon was counterbalanced by a deprivation of carbon in other land areas.

show abstract

“…FADN only considers farms with more than 0.75 work units, while our exhaustive survey of farms included three farmers with off-farm jobs, with less than 0.75 work units. As no indicator of nitrogen balance was available in the FADN, we compared our results (i) at national scale, with Simon et al (2000) who evaluated the NS of 555 French farms as a function of the farming system and (ii) at European scale, to other European studies, in which the nitrogen farm-gate balance was calculated as a function of farming systems: de Koeijer et al (1995) in the Netherlands, Lord et al (2002) in the United Kingdom and Bassanino et al (2007) in Italy.…”

Section: Research Context and Study Areamentioning

confidence: 99%

Mixed crop-livestock systems: an economic and environmental-friendly way of farming?

Ryschawy

Choisis

et al. 2012

animal

198

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intensification and specialisation of agriculture in developed countries enabled productivity to be improved but had detrimental impacts on the environment and threatened the economic viability of a huge number of farms. The combination of livestock and crops, which was very common in the past, is assumed to be a viable alternative to specialised livestock or cropping systems. Mixed crop-livestock systems can improve nutrient cycling while reducing chemical inputs and generate economies of scope at farm level. Most assumptions underlying these views are based on theoretical and experimental evidence. Very few assessments of their environmental and economic advantages have nevertheless been undertaken in real-world farming conditions. In this paper, we present a comparative assessment of the environmental and economic performances of mixed crop-livestock farms v. specialised farms among the farm population of the French 'Coteaux de Gascogne'. In this hilly region, half of the farms currently use a mixed crop-livestock system including beef cattle and cash crops, the remaining farms being specialised in either crops or cattle. Data were collected through an exhaustive survey of farms located in our study area. The economic performances of farming systems were assessed on 48 farms on the basis of (i) overall gross margin, (ii) production costs and (iii) analysis of the sensitivity of gross margins to fluctuations in the price of inputs and outputs. The environmental dimension was analysed through (i) characterisation of farmers' crop management practices, (ii) analysis of farm land use diversity and (iii) nitrogen farm-gate balance. Local mixed crop-livestock farms did not have significantly higher overall gross margins than specialised farms but were less sensitive than dairy and crop farms to fluctuations in the price of inputs and outputs considered. Mixed crop-livestock farms had lower costs than crop farms, while beef farms had the lowest costs as they are grass-based systems. Concerning crop management practices, our results revealed an intensification gradient from low to high input farming systems. Beyond some general trends, a wide range of management practices and levels of intensification were observed among farms with a similar production system. Mixed crop-livestock farms were very heterogeneous with respect to the use of inputs. Nevertheless, our study revealed a lower potential for nitrogen pollution in mixed crop-livestock and beef production systems than in dairy and crop farming systems. Even if a wide variability exists within system, mixed crop-livestock systems appear to be a way for an environmental and economical sustainable agriculture.

show abstract

Nitrogen balances at the crop and farm-gate scale in livestock farms in Italy

Cited by 62 publications

References 45 publications

Assessing Nitrogen Use Efficiency and Nitrogen Loss in a Forage-Based System Using a Modeling Approach

Assessing Nitrogen Use Efficiency and Nitrogen Loss in a Forage-Based System Using a Modeling Approach

Effect of integrated forage rotation and manure management on yield, nutrient balance and soil organic matter

Mixed crop-livestock systems: an economic and environmental-friendly way of farming?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About