تأثیر کمپوست برخی پسماندها و بقایای کشاورزی در دو کشت متوالی اسفناج: 1- پاسخ شناسه‌های حاصلخیزی خاک، جذب عناصر غذایی و عملکرد گیاه

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسندگان

• خدیجه سالاری نیک
• محسن نائل

گروه علوم و مهندسی خاک، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه بوعلی سینا، همدان، ایران

https://doi.org/10.22067/jsw.2023.83762.1318

چکیده

استفاده از کمپوست پسماندهای کشاورزی در نظام­های کشت یک مدیریتِ بالقوه پایدار در جهت بهبود کیفیت و حاصلخیزی خاک و افزایش عملکرد و سلامتی محصول است. در این پژوهش، تأثیر هشت کمپوست تولید شده از تفاله انگور (G) (در دو سطح کم (LG) (37 تا 42 درصد) و زیاد (HG) (60 تا 63 درصد)) در ترکیب با یونجه (A)، تفاله چغندر (B) و کاه نخود (Ch)، در مقایسه با دو سطح کود اوره (C150 و C500) و یک تیمار شاهد (C0)، بر حاصلخیزی خاک و عملکرد گیاه اسفناج در دو کشت متوالی (بهار و پاییز) مطالعه شد. عملکرد اسفناج در هر دو فصل کشت، اختلاف معناداری بین تیمارهای کمپوست و کود شیمیایی نشان نداد، بجز تیمار LG-Ch-A که در فصل بهار عملکرد بیشتری از تیمار C150 داشت. با این حال در کشت اول، تیمارهای LG-Ch-A و C500، و در کشت دوم، تیمارهای HG-All (متشکل از تمام مواد اولیه)، LG-All و LG-A-B به‌طور معناداری عملکرد بیشتری نسبت به تیمار شاهد داشتند. به‌دلیل جذب عناصر توسط گیاه، افزایش pH، افزایش مقدار کربن آلی خاک و هم­چنین آبشویی در پی بارندگی شدید در کشت دوم، غلظت عناصر کم‌مصرف خاک در همه­ی تیمارها نسبت به فصل اول کشت کاهش یافت. تیمارهای HG-Ch-A و HG-Ch-B سبب افزایش مقادیر N، P، K، Mg، کربن آلی و کربن فعال در فصل دوم کشت نسبت به فصل اول کشت شدند؛ در مقابل، کاهش مقدار نیتروژن کل در دو تیمار LG-Ch-A و LG-A-B نسبت به فصل اول کشت مشاهده شد. تیمار LG-All بهترین تیمار از نظر افزایش غلظت N، P و K، و کاهش غلظت نیترات خاک در بین همه­ی تیمارها بود. تیمار HG-Ch-A با وجود افزایش هدایت الکتریکی خاک، به‌دلیل مقدار سدیم کم و حاصلخیزی بالا بعد از تیمار LG-All قرار گرفت. مقادیر تمام عناصر پرمصرف و کم‌مصرف، بجز Fe و Ca، در تیمارهای کمپوست نسبت به تیمارهای شاهد و شیمیایی افزایش نشان داد. به­علاوه، در تیمارهای کمپوست افزایش EC (9 تا 211 درصد) نسبت به تیمارهای شاهد و شیمیایی، و افزایش pH (2/0 تا 3 درصد) نسبت به تیمار C500 مشاهده شد. در مقابل، تخلیه تمام عناصر، بجز کربن آلی، در تیمارهای کود شیمیایی و شاهد به دلیل جذب توسط گیاه اتفاق افتاد. تیمار C500 سبب افزایش غلظت نیترات خاک شد. برطبق تحلیل خوشه­بندی، تیمارهای شاهد و شیمیایی کشت اول در گروه یک، تیمارهای شاهد و شیمیایی کشت دوم در گروه دو، تیمارهای کمپوستِ کشت دوم در گروه سه، تیمارهای کمپوست کشت اول، بجز تیمارHG-All ، در گروه چهارم و تیمار HG-All کشت اول در گروه پنجم قرار گرفتند. به‌طور کلی با وجود تأثیر مثبت کمپوست­های به‌کار رفته در افزایش حاصلخیزی خاک، استفاده پیوسته این ترکیبات آلی به مقدار زیاد، به‌دلیل افزایش EC و pH در خاک­های مناطق خشک دارای محدودیت است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

• تفاله انگور
• تفاله چغندر
• کربن آلی
• نیترات خاک

موضوعات

• علوم خاک

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Impact of Agricultural Waste and Residue Composts on Two Consecutive Spinach Cultivations: 1- Response of Soil Fertility Indicators, Plant Nutrient Uptake, and Yield

نویسندگان [English]

• Kh. Salarinik
• M. Nael

Soil Science Dept., Faculty of Agriculture, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran

چکیده [English]

Introduction
Large amounts of agricultural waste such as straw, leaves and pulps, with high nutritional value are produced every year. Grape pomace (GP) is rich in macro- and micro-nutrients and can be used as a soil amendment. However, due to its slow decomposition rate and the spread of diseases and pests, it should not be applied directly to the soil. Therefore, GP is composted in combination with other wastes. There is not enough information about the composting of GP and the effect of the produced composts on soil fertility in Iran. Hence, the aims of this study were twofold: to explore the impact of various GP composts on both soil fertility and spinach yield, relative to two levels of urea fertilizer, through a pot experiment conducted over two consecutive cultivation seasons; to categorize soil treatments based on fertilization regimes and timing (season), thus elucidating any patterns or trends in the observed effects.
 
Materials and Methods
To investigate the effects of GP composts on soil fertility and spinach (Persius hybrid) yield, was conducted as a randomized complete block design with eight compost treatments, two levels of urea fertilizer (46%), and a control treatment (C0), in three replications and two continuous cropping seasons (spring and fall). Compost treatments included: high grape pomace (HG) (60-63%) with chickpea straw and alfalfa (HG-Ch-A), high GP with chickpea straw and sugar beet pulp (HG-Ch-B), high GP with alfalfa and sugar beet pulp (HG-A-B), high GP combined with chickpea straw, alfalfa, and sugar beet pulp (HG-All); four other compost treatments included low level of grape pomace (LG) (37-42%) combined with other residues/wastes similar to the first four treatments (LG-Ch-A, LG-Ch-B, LG-A-B, and LG-All). Urea treatments included: 150 kg per hectare (C150) (two-step top dressing) and 500 kg per hectare (C500) (three-step top dressing). A sandy loam soil was used for this experiment. The composts were separately mixed into the soil at a rate of 2% (by weight(. The first crop was grown for 50 days in May 2018 and the second crop was grown for 45 days in September 2018. In both seasons, the fresh and oven-dried weigh of spinach shoot and root were determined. Also, total concentration of K, Na, Ca, Mg, P, Fe, Zn, Cu, and NO₃^- were measured in spinach to determine the amount of soil elements taken up by the crop. In both seasons, soil pH and EC, and contents of soil organic carbon (OC), active carbon (AC), total nitrogen (TN), NO₃^-, NH₄⁺, and exchangeable K, Ca, Mg, and Na, as well as available forms of P, Fe, Cu, and Zn were determined. One-way ANOVAs were applied separately to spring and fall data, and mean comparisons were made using Duncan's test at 0.05% level. To determine the similarities and dissimilarities of the different treatments based on their effect on soil characteristics, cluster analysis was performed on all soil characteristics that showed significant differences between treatments.
 
Results and Discussion
In both cultivation periods, TN levels exhibited no significant variance across treatments. Notably, the highest potassium (K) levels were consistently observed in the HG-All and LG-All treatments, while the lowest K levels were consistently recorded in the C0, C150, and C500 treatments. In the initial cultivation period, no notable differences were observed between the C0, C150, and C500 treatments, except for potassium (K) and ammonium (NH4+), with significantly higher levels detected in the C0 treatment. Conversely, during the second cultivation period, significant disparities were observed among the C0, C150, and C500 treatments solely in terms of nitrate (NO3-) content, with notably higher nitrate levels detected in the C150 and C500 treatments. Through cluster analysis, all treatments from both cultivation periods were categorized into five distinct groups. Specifically, the C0, C150, and C500 treatments for each season were consistently grouped together, respectively, into groups one and two. All compost treatments of each season, except the HG-All treatment in the spring cultivation, were grouped into one class. In the second cultivation, the HG-Ch-A showed significantly higher EC than all treatments, except the HG-Ch-B. The LG-A-B treatment showed the highest amount of OC and C/N (in both cultivations), and NH₄⁺ and Cu (in the second cultivation). The HG-Ch-A and HG-Ch-B treatments increased TN, P, K, Mg, OC, and AC in the second cultivation compared to the first. The amounts of all macronutrients and micronutrients, except Fe and Ca, increased in the compost treatments compared to the control and chemical treatments. In addition, an increase in EC was observed in the compost treatments compared to the control and chemical treatments, and an increase in pH compared to the C500 treatment. In the first cultivation, the LG-Ch-A and C500 treatments had significantly higher yields than the control. In the second cultivation, the LG-All, HG-All, HG-Ch-A, and LG-A-B treatments were the best compost treatments, while the LG-Ch-B and HG-Ch-B treatments were the weakest treatments in terms of soil fertility and plant yield. In both seasons, the absorption of elements by spinach depended on multiple factors, including the element type, its available content in the soil, its initial content in the composts (or fertilizer), soil pH, and yield.
 
Conclusion
The application of GP composts over two consecutive growing seasons increased the levels of nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium, zinc, copper, active carbon and organic carbon in the soils. These results are very important as magnesium, copper and zinc are rarely applied by farmers. In contrast, depletion of all elements, except organic carbon, occurred in the control and chemical fertilizer treatments due to plant uptake of elements. The combination of chickpea straw with sugar beet pulp is not recommended for the production of GP compost, especially at low GP levels, due to its minimal effect on soil fertility and plant yield. Despite the positive effect of the GP composts in increasing soil fertility, the continuous application of large amounts of these composts is not recommended in the arid regions due to the increase in soil EC and pH. The difference between the compost treatments after two applications of GP composts was less than after one application; these results were confirmed by cluster analysis, in the sense that all compost treatments in the second season were placed in one cluster.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

• Grape pomace
• Organic carbon
• Sugar beet pulp
• Soil nitrate

©2023 The author(s). This is an open access article distributed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source.

مراجع

1. Agriculture Jihad Organization of Hamedan Province. (2022). Basic statistics of 2021, Deputy of planning and economic affairs, Department of Statistics and Information Technology. Hamedan.
2. Ajila, C.M., Brar, S.K., Verma, M., & Prasada Rao, U.J.S. (2012). Sustainable solutions for agro processing waste management: An overview. In Environmental Protection Strategies for Sustainable Development, 65–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1591-2_3
3. Aytenew, M., & Bore, G. (2020). Effects of organic amendments on soil fertility and environmental quality: A review. Journal of Plant Sciences, 8(5), 112. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jps.20200805.12
4. Bastida, F., Kandeler, E., Hernández, T., & García, C. (2008). Long-term effect of municipal solid waste amendment on microbial abundance and humus-associated enzyme activities under semiarid conditions. Microbial Ecology, 55(4), 651–661. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-007-9308-0
5. Bernal, M.P., Paredes, C., Sánchez-Monedero, M.A., & Cegarra, J. (1998). Maturity and stability parameters of composts prepared with a wide range of organic wastes. Bioresource Technology, 63(1), 91–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(97)00084-9
6. Bulluck, L.R., Brosius, M., Evanylo, G.K., & Ristaino, J.B. (2002). Organic and synthetic fertility amendments influence soil microbial, physical and chemical properties on organic and conventional farms. Applied Soil Ecology, 19(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0929-1393(01)00187-1
7. Butler, T.J., & Muir, J.P. (2006). Dairy manure compost improves soil and increases tall wheatgrass yield. Agronomy Journal, 98(4), 1090–1096. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2005.0348
8. Cataldo, D.A., Haroon, M.H., Schrader, L.E., & Youngs, V.L. (1975). Rapid colorimetric determination of nitrate in plant tissue by nitration of salicylic acid. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 6(1), 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103627509366547
9. Cheng, K.L., & Bray, R.H. (1951). Determination of calcium and magnesium in soil and plant material. Soil Science, 72(6), 449–458. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-195112000-00005
10. CQCC- California Compost Quality Council. (2001). compost maturity index. 26.
11. Diacono, M., & Montemurro, F. (2011). Long-term effects of organic amendments on soil fertility. Sustainable Agriculture, 2, 761–786. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0394-0_34
12. Eleonora, N., Alina, D., Erzsebet, K., & Valeria, C. (2014). Grape pomace as fertilizer. Forestry and Biotechnology, 18(2), 141–145.
13. Estefan, G., Sommer, R., & Ryan, J. (2013). Methods of Soil , Plant , and Water Analysis : A manual for the West Asia and North (Third Edit). international center for agricultural research in the dry areas.
14. Fincheira-Robles, P., Martínez-Salgado, M., Ortega-Blu, R., & Janssens, M. (2016). Compost and humic substance effects on soil parameters of Vitis vinifera L cv Thompson seedless. Scientia Agropecuaria, 7, 291–296. https://doi.org/10.17268/sci.agropecu.2016.03.17
15. Ghaly, F., Baddour, G., & El-Azazy, H. (2017). Nitrate accumulation and oxalate formation in spinach plants (Spinacia oleracea) as affected by nitrogen fertilization levels and iron foliar application. Journal of Soil Sciences and Agricultural Engineering, 8(11), 571–576. https://doi.org/10.21608/jssae.2017.38092
16. Gurmu, G. (2019). Soil organic matter and its role in soil health and crop productivity improvement. Journal of Agricultural Science and Research, 7(7), 475–483.
17. Hansen, L., Noe, E., & Højring, K. (2006). Nature and nature values in organic agriculture. An analysis of contested concepts and values among different actors in organic farming. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 19(2), 147–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-005-1804-y
18. Hendershot, W., Lalande, H., & Duquette, M. (2007). Soil Reaction and Exchangeable Acidity. In E. Carter, M.R., Gregorich (Ed.), Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis, Second Edition (p. 1224). https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420005271.ch16
19. Huang, C.Y.L., & Schulte, E.E. (1985). Digestion of plant tissue for analysis by ICP emission spectroscopy. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 16(9), 943–958. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103628509367657
20. Kabirinejad, S., & Hoodaji, M. (2012). The effects of biosolid application on soil chemical properties and Zea mays International Journal of Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture, 1(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/2251-7715-1-4
21. Karaca, A. (2004). Effect of organic wastes on the extractability of cadmium, copper, nickel, and zinc in soil. Geoderma, 122(2-4 SPEC. IIS.), 297–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2004.01.016
22. Klute, A. (1966). "Methods and soil analysis. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 432–449.
23. Komolafe, A.F., Adejuyigbe, C.O., Babalola, O.A., Soretire, A.A., & Kayode, C.O. (2021). Fertilizer values of composts as affected by plant materials and composting duration on maize (Zea mays) performance. Agro-Science, 20(1), 87–94. https://doi.org/10.4314/as.v20i1.14
24. Li, L., Tang, C., Rengel, Z., & Zhang, F.S. (2004). Calcium, magnesium and microelement uptake as affected by phosphorus sources and interspecific root interactions between wheat and chickpea. Plant and Soil, 261(1–2), 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PLSO.0000035579.39823.16
25. Lindsay, W.L., & Norvell, W.A. (1978). Development of a DTPA soil test for Zinc, Iron, Manganese, and Copper. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 42(3), 421–428. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1978.03615995004 200030009x
26. Machado, R.M.A., Alves-Pereira, I., Lourenço, D., & Ferreira, R.M.A. (2020). Effect of organic compost and inorganic nitrogen fertigation on spinach growth, phytochemical accumulation and antioxidant activity. Heliyon, 6(9). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05085
27. Martínez, M.M., Ortega, R., Janssens, M., & Fincheira, P. (2018). Use of organic amendments in table grape: Effect on plant root system and soil quality indicators. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 18(1), 100–112. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-95162018005000501
28. Mbarki, S., Labidi, N., Mahmoudi, H., Jedidi, N., & Abdelly, C. (2008). Contrasting effects of municipal compost on alfalfa growth in clay and in sandy soils: N, P, K, content and heavy metal toxicity. Bioresource Technology, 99(15), 6745–6750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2008.01.010
29. McConnell, D.B., Shiralipour, A., & Smith, W.H. (1993). Compost application improves soil properties. BioCycle, 34(4), 61–63.
30. Mellano, V.J., & Bevacqua, R.F. (1992). Sewage sludge compost as a soil amendment for horticultural crops. HortScience, 27(6), 697a–697. https://doi.org/10.21273/hortsci.27.6.697a
31. Mirabella, N., Castellani, V., & Sala, S. (2014). Current options for the valorization of food manufacturing waste: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 65, 28–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.10.051
32. Mohamed, A., Ali, O., & Matloub, M. (2007). Effect of soil amendments on some physical and chemical properties of some soils of Egypt under saline irrigation water. Society Conference, El-Minia, Egypt, 8, 1571–1578.
33. Motsara, M.R., & Roy, R.N. (2008). Guide to laboratory establishment for plant nutrient analysis. Fao Fertilizer and Plant Nutrition Bulletin 19, 219.
34. Najafi-Ghiri, M., & Rahimi, T. (2016). Zinc uptake by Spinach (Spinacia oleracea) as affected by zn application rate, Zeolite, and Vermicompost. Compost Science and Utilization, 24(3), 203–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/1065657X.2015.1124818
35. Nerantzis, E.T., & Tataridis, P. (2006). Integrated enology utilization of winery by-products into high added value products. E-Journal of Science and Technology, 1(3), 79–89.
36. Olsen, S.R., Cole, C.V, Watandbe, F., & Dean, L. (1954). Estimation of available phosphorus in soil by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 53(9), 1689–1699.
37. Papadimitriou, E. K., Chatjipavlidis, I., & Balis, C. (1997). Application of composting to olive mill wastewater treatment. Environmental Technology (United Kingdom), 18(1), 101–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593331808616517
38. Rezaee, Z., Norouzi Masir, M., & Moezzi, A. (2021). Effect of compost and biochar of bagasses on zinc uptake and growth indices of Wheat under greenhouse condition. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Soil Science and Agricultural Mechanization, (Scientific Journal of Agriculture), 44(2), 255–274.
39. Rhoades, J.D. (1996). Salinity: Electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids. In Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 3: Chemical Methods (pp. 417–435). https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser5.3.c14
40. Riley, J.P., & Sinhaseni, P. (1957). The determination of ammonia and total ionic inorganic nitrogen in sea water. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 36(1), 161–168. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315400017161
41. Rubio, R., Pérez-Murcia, M.D., Agulló, E., Bustamante, M.A., Sánchez, C., Paredes, C., & Moral, R. (2013). Recycling of agro-food wastes into vineyards by composting: agronomic validation in field conditions. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 44(1–4), 502–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2013.744152
42. Rutherford, P.M., McGill, W.B., Arocena, J.M., & Figueiredo, C.T. (2008). Total Nitrogen. In M. R. Carter & E. G. Gregorich (Eds.), Soil Sampling and Methods of Analysis (Second Edi, pp. 239–250). Canadian society of soil science. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420005271-30
43. Sánchez-Monedero, M.A., Roig, A., Paredes, C., & Bernal, M.P. (2001). Nitrogen transformation during organic waste composting by the Rutgers system and its effects on pH, EC and maturity of the composting mixtures. Bioresource Technology, 78(3), 301–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(01)00031-1
44. SAS Institute Inc. (2013). SAS/ACCESS® 9.4 Interface to ADABAS: Reference. (9.4). Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.
45. Sodhi, G.P.S., Beri, V., & Benbi, D.K. (2009). Soil aggregation and distribution of carbon and nitrogen in different fractions under long-term application of compost in rice-wheat system. Soil and Tillage Research, 103(2), 412–418. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2008.12.005
46. Stevenson, F.J. (2018). Organic matter-micronutrient reactions in soil. Micronutrients in Agriculture, 145–186. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssabookser4.2ed.c6
47. Ugwuoke, C.U., Monwuba, N., Onu, F.M., Shimave, A.G., Okonkwo, E.N., & Opurum, C.C. (2018). Impact of agricultural waste on sustainable environment and health of rural women. Civil and Environmental Research, 10(9), 1–9.
48. Van der Wurff, A.W.G., Fuchs, J.G., Raviv, M., & Termorshuizen, A. (2016). Handbook for composting and compost use in organic horticulture. In A. J. Van der Wurff, A.W.G., Fuchs, J.G., Raviv, M., Termorshuizen (Ed.), Veer Ecology. https://doi.org/10.18174/375218
49. Vendrell, P.F., & Zupancic, J. (1990). Determination of soil nitrate by transnitration of salicylic acid. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 21(13–16), 1705–1713. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103629009368334
50. Walkley, A., & Black, I.A. (1934). An examination of the degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method. Soil Science 37(1), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1097/00010694-193401000-00003
51. Weil, R.R., Islam, K.R., Stine, M., Gruver, J.B., & Samson-Liebig, S.E. (2003). Estimating active carbon for soil quality assessment: A simplified method for laboratory and field use. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 18(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1079/ajaa2003003
52. Yeomans, J.C., & Bremner, J.M. (1988). A rapid and precise method for routine determination of organic carbon in soil1. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 19(13), 1467–1476. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103628809368027
53. Zhao, B., Maeda, M., Zhang, J., Zhu, A., & Ozaki, Y. (2006). Accumulation and chemical fractionation of heavy metals in andisols after a different, 6-year fertilization management. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 13(2), 90–97. https://doi.org/10.1065/espr2005.06.268
54. Zheljazkov, V.D., & Warman, P.R. (2002). Comparison of three digestion methods for the recovery of 17 plant essential nutrients and trace elements from six composts. Compost Science and Utilization, 10(3), 197–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/1065657X.2002.10702081