Nitrogen leaching under alternative forages grazed by sheep
Sheep farmers can increase production levels as a means to improve economic outcomes. However, this intensification can potentially result in more nitrogen (N) leaching which is at odds with the increasing pressure on farmers to reduce the quantity of N lost into the environment. Therefore, there is...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of agronomy 2023-11, Vol.151, p.126991, Article 126991 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Sheep farmers can increase production levels as a means to improve economic outcomes. However, this intensification can potentially result in more nitrogen (N) leaching which is at odds with the increasing pressure on farmers to reduce the quantity of N lost into the environment. Therefore, there is increasing interest in the use of alternative forages, such as Italian ryegrass and plantain, which could potentially allow farmers to increase production while decreasing N leaching. This study quantified and compared the quantity of N leaching under sheep grazing four different forages: perennial ryegrass/white clover (RGWC), Italian ryegrass/WC (IRWC), plantain/WC (PWC) and a winter brassica. Five replicates of each forage were established on plots of 800 m2 (40 m x 20 m). Each plot had an independent mole-pipe drain system with tipping-bucket monitoring equipment at the end of the pipe drain. Drainage volume and N concentrations (nitrate-N: NO3⁻-N; ammonium-N; total-N) in drainage water were measured to estimate N losses. The forages were grazed according to the best management practice for each forage type over a two-and-a-half-year period (Year 1: July-December 2019; Year 2: January-December 2020; and Year 3: January-December 2021). In the first two years of this study, NO3⁻-N leaching losses under IRWC and PWC were very small (ranging from 0.4 to 0.5 kg N/ha), and they were not different (P > 0.05) from those under RGWC. However, in Year 3, the leaching losses under IRWC and PWC treatments were greater (P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1161-0301 |
DOI: | 10.1016/j.eja.2023.126991 |