Improving crop growing conditions with water treatment residual and compost co‐amendments: Soil–water dynamics

Land application of water treatment residual (WTR) in combination with phosphate‐rich organic wastes, like compost or sewage sludge, in nutrient‐poor soils was previously shown to promote crop growth. This WTR diversion from landfill to agriculture supports local and international mandates for waste...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of environmental quality 2024-03, Vol.53 (2), p.174-186
Hauptverfasser: Stone, Wendy, Steytler, Jan, Jager, Lurika, Hardie, Ailsa, Clarke, Catherine E.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 186
container_issue 2
container_start_page 174
container_title Journal of environmental quality
container_volume 53
creator Stone, Wendy
Steytler, Jan
Jager, Lurika
Hardie, Ailsa
Clarke, Catherine E.
description Land application of water treatment residual (WTR) in combination with phosphate‐rich organic wastes, like compost or sewage sludge, in nutrient‐poor soils was previously shown to promote crop growth. This WTR diversion from landfill to agriculture supports local and international mandates for waste circularity. Although soil–water dynamics—like saturated hydraulic conductivity, water retention, and hydrophobicity—are well‐defined for compost and somewhat defined for WTR (except for hydrophobicity), the impacts of co‐amending sandy soils with both are not well‐defined. In laboratory analyses, co‐amendment had an intermediate effect between individual amendments on the hydrophobic sandy soils, increasing water retention by 27% (WTR and compost both increased water retention), decreasing hydrophobicity by increasing hydraulic conductivity twofold (WTR and compost both decreased hydrophobicity), and having no effect on saturated hydraulic conductivity (decreased by WTR and increased by compost). With two positive effects and one “no effect” on soil–water dynamics in laboratory trials, the co‐amendment was expected to buffer both crop water use efficiency (WUE) and nutrient availability under drought stress, for Swiss chard (Beta vulgaris L. var. cicla), co‐investigated in a multifactorial pot trial. Soil nutrients, particularly phosphate, were shown more critical than soil–water dynamics to improve crop WUE. Thus, co‐amended soils have significantly higher crop biomass and WUE than sandy soils. Phosphate‐rich organic co‐amendment is necessary for crop nutrient sufficiency and thus drought resilience in sandy soils amended with WTR. Thus, pairing wastes to soils for optimum fertility is a critical consideration in waste land application for both biomass and drought resilience. Core Ideas Water retention is increased in sandy soils by water treatment residual (WTR), compost, and their co‐amendment. Hydrophobicity is decreased in sandy soils by WTR, compost, and their co‐amendment. Saturated hydraulic conductivity is increased by compost, decreased by WTR, and co‐amendment has no effect. WUE strongly correlates with soil phosphate and crop biomass, more than soil–water parameters. WTR must be co‐applied with a nutrient‐rich waste, promoting crop biomass and consequently drought resilience. Plain Language Summary Sludge wastes from the clean drinking water treatment process (called water treatment residuals, WTR) can improve sandy soil, for growing crops. Sludges
doi_str_mv 10.1002/jeq2.20541
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2921115613</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2921115613</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3651-a8377b0536ca16a542654e154d9ca1c7b80da3eb5410de803d17bf7f87ec6ecb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtOwzAQhi0EoqWw4QAoS4SU4kccp-xQVaCoEkLAOnLiSXGVR7ETou56BCRu2JPgNoUlG4_H_uaX5kPonOAhwZheL-CDDinmATlAfcKZ8Kk7DlEf48DdA8p76MTaBcaEYhEeox6L6EgQFvaRmRZLU33qcu6lplp6c1O1u6Yqla51VVqv1fW718oajFcbkHUBZe0ZsFo1MvdkqRxcLCtbu7pZf0n3r7aMvfFeKp1v1t_dsFqVstCpPUVHmcwtnO3rAL3dTV7HD_7s6X46vp35KQs58WXEhEgwZ2EqSSh5QEMeAOGBGrmHVCQRVpJB4tbGCiLMFBFJJrJIQBpCmrABuuxy3YIfDdg6LrRNIc9lCVVjYzqihBAeEubQqw51Dqw1kMVLowtpVjHB8dZxvHUc7xw7-GKf2yQFqD_0V6oDSAe0OofVP1Hx4-SZdqE_RiyKnA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2921115613</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Improving crop growing conditions with water treatment residual and compost co‐amendments: Soil–water dynamics</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Stone, Wendy ; Steytler, Jan ; Jager, Lurika ; Hardie, Ailsa ; Clarke, Catherine E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Stone, Wendy ; Steytler, Jan ; Jager, Lurika ; Hardie, Ailsa ; Clarke, Catherine E.</creatorcontrib><description>Land application of water treatment residual (WTR) in combination with phosphate‐rich organic wastes, like compost or sewage sludge, in nutrient‐poor soils was previously shown to promote crop growth. This WTR diversion from landfill to agriculture supports local and international mandates for waste circularity. Although soil–water dynamics—like saturated hydraulic conductivity, water retention, and hydrophobicity—are well‐defined for compost and somewhat defined for WTR (except for hydrophobicity), the impacts of co‐amending sandy soils with both are not well‐defined. In laboratory analyses, co‐amendment had an intermediate effect between individual amendments on the hydrophobic sandy soils, increasing water retention by 27% (WTR and compost both increased water retention), decreasing hydrophobicity by increasing hydraulic conductivity twofold (WTR and compost both decreased hydrophobicity), and having no effect on saturated hydraulic conductivity (decreased by WTR and increased by compost). With two positive effects and one “no effect” on soil–water dynamics in laboratory trials, the co‐amendment was expected to buffer both crop water use efficiency (WUE) and nutrient availability under drought stress, for Swiss chard (Beta vulgaris L. var. cicla), co‐investigated in a multifactorial pot trial. Soil nutrients, particularly phosphate, were shown more critical than soil–water dynamics to improve crop WUE. Thus, co‐amended soils have significantly higher crop biomass and WUE than sandy soils. Phosphate‐rich organic co‐amendment is necessary for crop nutrient sufficiency and thus drought resilience in sandy soils amended with WTR. Thus, pairing wastes to soils for optimum fertility is a critical consideration in waste land application for both biomass and drought resilience. Core Ideas Water retention is increased in sandy soils by water treatment residual (WTR), compost, and their co‐amendment. Hydrophobicity is decreased in sandy soils by WTR, compost, and their co‐amendment. Saturated hydraulic conductivity is increased by compost, decreased by WTR, and co‐amendment has no effect. WUE strongly correlates with soil phosphate and crop biomass, more than soil–water parameters. WTR must be co‐applied with a nutrient‐rich waste, promoting crop biomass and consequently drought resilience. Plain Language Summary Sludge wastes from the clean drinking water treatment process (called water treatment residuals, WTR) can improve sandy soil, for growing crops. Sludges have nutrients and clay‐like properties that fortify the sandy soil. However, they also limit soil phosphate by sorbing it, and phosphate is important for plant growth. So, high‐phosphate wastes like compost are added with these WTR sludges to sandy soils, to help plants grow. There is not much work on the effects of compost and WTR added together, on soil‐water patterns. Here, it was shown that WTR and compost added together increase the soil's capacity to hold water (water retention, infiltration), which is good for crop growth. Together, they also make the soil less hydrophobic and water repellent, which is also good for crop growth. Finally, spinach grown on the sandy soils used water more efficiently with the co‐amendment added, more because of the added soil phosphate than soil‐water dynamics.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0047-2425</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-2537</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jeq2.20541</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38297136</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Agriculture ; Composting ; Phosphates ; Sewage ; Soil - chemistry ; Water Purification</subject><ispartof>Journal of environmental quality, 2024-03, Vol.53 (2), p.174-186</ispartof><rights>2024 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.</rights><rights>2024 The Authors. Journal of Environmental Quality published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3651-a8377b0536ca16a542654e154d9ca1c7b80da3eb5410de803d17bf7f87ec6ecb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3651-a8377b0536ca16a542654e154d9ca1c7b80da3eb5410de803d17bf7f87ec6ecb3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-2495-117X ; 0000-0001-9126-6362</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjeq2.20541$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjeq2.20541$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38297136$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stone, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steytler, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jager, Lurika</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hardie, Ailsa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clarke, Catherine E.</creatorcontrib><title>Improving crop growing conditions with water treatment residual and compost co‐amendments: Soil–water dynamics</title><title>Journal of environmental quality</title><addtitle>J Environ Qual</addtitle><description>Land application of water treatment residual (WTR) in combination with phosphate‐rich organic wastes, like compost or sewage sludge, in nutrient‐poor soils was previously shown to promote crop growth. This WTR diversion from landfill to agriculture supports local and international mandates for waste circularity. Although soil–water dynamics—like saturated hydraulic conductivity, water retention, and hydrophobicity—are well‐defined for compost and somewhat defined for WTR (except for hydrophobicity), the impacts of co‐amending sandy soils with both are not well‐defined. In laboratory analyses, co‐amendment had an intermediate effect between individual amendments on the hydrophobic sandy soils, increasing water retention by 27% (WTR and compost both increased water retention), decreasing hydrophobicity by increasing hydraulic conductivity twofold (WTR and compost both decreased hydrophobicity), and having no effect on saturated hydraulic conductivity (decreased by WTR and increased by compost). With two positive effects and one “no effect” on soil–water dynamics in laboratory trials, the co‐amendment was expected to buffer both crop water use efficiency (WUE) and nutrient availability under drought stress, for Swiss chard (Beta vulgaris L. var. cicla), co‐investigated in a multifactorial pot trial. Soil nutrients, particularly phosphate, were shown more critical than soil–water dynamics to improve crop WUE. Thus, co‐amended soils have significantly higher crop biomass and WUE than sandy soils. Phosphate‐rich organic co‐amendment is necessary for crop nutrient sufficiency and thus drought resilience in sandy soils amended with WTR. Thus, pairing wastes to soils for optimum fertility is a critical consideration in waste land application for both biomass and drought resilience. Core Ideas Water retention is increased in sandy soils by water treatment residual (WTR), compost, and their co‐amendment. Hydrophobicity is decreased in sandy soils by WTR, compost, and their co‐amendment. Saturated hydraulic conductivity is increased by compost, decreased by WTR, and co‐amendment has no effect. WUE strongly correlates with soil phosphate and crop biomass, more than soil–water parameters. WTR must be co‐applied with a nutrient‐rich waste, promoting crop biomass and consequently drought resilience. Plain Language Summary Sludge wastes from the clean drinking water treatment process (called water treatment residuals, WTR) can improve sandy soil, for growing crops. Sludges have nutrients and clay‐like properties that fortify the sandy soil. However, they also limit soil phosphate by sorbing it, and phosphate is important for plant growth. So, high‐phosphate wastes like compost are added with these WTR sludges to sandy soils, to help plants grow. There is not much work on the effects of compost and WTR added together, on soil‐water patterns. Here, it was shown that WTR and compost added together increase the soil's capacity to hold water (water retention, infiltration), which is good for crop growth. Together, they also make the soil less hydrophobic and water repellent, which is also good for crop growth. Finally, spinach grown on the sandy soils used water more efficiently with the co‐amendment added, more because of the added soil phosphate than soil‐water dynamics.</description><subject>Agriculture</subject><subject>Composting</subject><subject>Phosphates</subject><subject>Sewage</subject><subject>Soil - chemistry</subject><subject>Water Purification</subject><issn>0047-2425</issn><issn>1537-2537</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtOwzAQhi0EoqWw4QAoS4SU4kccp-xQVaCoEkLAOnLiSXGVR7ETou56BCRu2JPgNoUlG4_H_uaX5kPonOAhwZheL-CDDinmATlAfcKZ8Kk7DlEf48DdA8p76MTaBcaEYhEeox6L6EgQFvaRmRZLU33qcu6lplp6c1O1u6Yqla51VVqv1fW718oajFcbkHUBZe0ZsFo1MvdkqRxcLCtbu7pZf0n3r7aMvfFeKp1v1t_dsFqVstCpPUVHmcwtnO3rAL3dTV7HD_7s6X46vp35KQs58WXEhEgwZ2EqSSh5QEMeAOGBGrmHVCQRVpJB4tbGCiLMFBFJJrJIQBpCmrABuuxy3YIfDdg6LrRNIc9lCVVjYzqihBAeEubQqw51Dqw1kMVLowtpVjHB8dZxvHUc7xw7-GKf2yQFqD_0V6oDSAe0OofVP1Hx4-SZdqE_RiyKnA</recordid><startdate>202403</startdate><enddate>202403</enddate><creator>Stone, Wendy</creator><creator>Steytler, Jan</creator><creator>Jager, Lurika</creator><creator>Hardie, Ailsa</creator><creator>Clarke, Catherine E.</creator><scope>24P</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2495-117X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9126-6362</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202403</creationdate><title>Improving crop growing conditions with water treatment residual and compost co‐amendments: Soil–water dynamics</title><author>Stone, Wendy ; Steytler, Jan ; Jager, Lurika ; Hardie, Ailsa ; Clarke, Catherine E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3651-a8377b0536ca16a542654e154d9ca1c7b80da3eb5410de803d17bf7f87ec6ecb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Agriculture</topic><topic>Composting</topic><topic>Phosphates</topic><topic>Sewage</topic><topic>Soil - chemistry</topic><topic>Water Purification</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stone, Wendy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Steytler, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jager, Lurika</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hardie, Ailsa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clarke, Catherine E.</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of environmental quality</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stone, Wendy</au><au>Steytler, Jan</au><au>Jager, Lurika</au><au>Hardie, Ailsa</au><au>Clarke, Catherine E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Improving crop growing conditions with water treatment residual and compost co‐amendments: Soil–water dynamics</atitle><jtitle>Journal of environmental quality</jtitle><addtitle>J Environ Qual</addtitle><date>2024-03</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>53</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>174</spage><epage>186</epage><pages>174-186</pages><issn>0047-2425</issn><eissn>1537-2537</eissn><abstract>Land application of water treatment residual (WTR) in combination with phosphate‐rich organic wastes, like compost or sewage sludge, in nutrient‐poor soils was previously shown to promote crop growth. This WTR diversion from landfill to agriculture supports local and international mandates for waste circularity. Although soil–water dynamics—like saturated hydraulic conductivity, water retention, and hydrophobicity—are well‐defined for compost and somewhat defined for WTR (except for hydrophobicity), the impacts of co‐amending sandy soils with both are not well‐defined. In laboratory analyses, co‐amendment had an intermediate effect between individual amendments on the hydrophobic sandy soils, increasing water retention by 27% (WTR and compost both increased water retention), decreasing hydrophobicity by increasing hydraulic conductivity twofold (WTR and compost both decreased hydrophobicity), and having no effect on saturated hydraulic conductivity (decreased by WTR and increased by compost). With two positive effects and one “no effect” on soil–water dynamics in laboratory trials, the co‐amendment was expected to buffer both crop water use efficiency (WUE) and nutrient availability under drought stress, for Swiss chard (Beta vulgaris L. var. cicla), co‐investigated in a multifactorial pot trial. Soil nutrients, particularly phosphate, were shown more critical than soil–water dynamics to improve crop WUE. Thus, co‐amended soils have significantly higher crop biomass and WUE than sandy soils. Phosphate‐rich organic co‐amendment is necessary for crop nutrient sufficiency and thus drought resilience in sandy soils amended with WTR. Thus, pairing wastes to soils for optimum fertility is a critical consideration in waste land application for both biomass and drought resilience. Core Ideas Water retention is increased in sandy soils by water treatment residual (WTR), compost, and their co‐amendment. Hydrophobicity is decreased in sandy soils by WTR, compost, and their co‐amendment. Saturated hydraulic conductivity is increased by compost, decreased by WTR, and co‐amendment has no effect. WUE strongly correlates with soil phosphate and crop biomass, more than soil–water parameters. WTR must be co‐applied with a nutrient‐rich waste, promoting crop biomass and consequently drought resilience. Plain Language Summary Sludge wastes from the clean drinking water treatment process (called water treatment residuals, WTR) can improve sandy soil, for growing crops. Sludges have nutrients and clay‐like properties that fortify the sandy soil. However, they also limit soil phosphate by sorbing it, and phosphate is important for plant growth. So, high‐phosphate wastes like compost are added with these WTR sludges to sandy soils, to help plants grow. There is not much work on the effects of compost and WTR added together, on soil‐water patterns. Here, it was shown that WTR and compost added together increase the soil's capacity to hold water (water retention, infiltration), which is good for crop growth. Together, they also make the soil less hydrophobic and water repellent, which is also good for crop growth. Finally, spinach grown on the sandy soils used water more efficiently with the co‐amendment added, more because of the added soil phosphate than soil‐water dynamics.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>38297136</pmid><doi>10.1002/jeq2.20541</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2495-117X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9126-6362</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0047-2425
ispartof Journal of environmental quality, 2024-03, Vol.53 (2), p.174-186
issn 0047-2425
1537-2537
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2921115613
source MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete
subjects Agriculture
Composting
Phosphates
Sewage
Soil - chemistry
Water Purification
title Improving crop growing conditions with water treatment residual and compost co‐amendments: Soil–water dynamics
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T23%3A50%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Improving%20crop%20growing%20conditions%20with%20water%20treatment%20residual%20and%20compost%20co%E2%80%90amendments:%20Soil%E2%80%93water%20dynamics&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20environmental%20quality&rft.au=Stone,%20Wendy&rft.date=2024-03&rft.volume=53&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=174&rft.epage=186&rft.pages=174-186&rft.issn=0047-2425&rft.eissn=1537-2537&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jeq2.20541&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2921115613%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2921115613&rft_id=info:pmid/38297136&rfr_iscdi=true