This article was downloaded by: [Aston University]

On: 30 January 2014, At: 04:35

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer
Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Compost Science & Utilization

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ucsu20

Farm Compost Application: Effects on Crop Performance

a b a a ab b
T. D'Hose , M. Cougnon , A. De Vliegher , K. Willekens , E. Van Bockstaele & D. Reheul
a
Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research ILVO, Merelbeke, Belgium
b
Department of Plant Production, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
Published online: 23 Jul 2013.

To cite this article: T. D'Hose, M. Cougnon, A. De Vliegher, K. Willekens, E. Van Bockstaele & D. Reheul (2012) Farm Compost Application:
Effects on Crop Performance, Compost Science & Utilization, 20:1, 49-56, DOI: 10.1080/1065657X.2012.10737022

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1065657X.2012.10737022

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications
on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever
as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this
publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy
of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor
and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the
use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction,
redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
49-56 D'Hose 3/12/12 10:02 AM Page 49

Compost Science & Utilization, (2012), Vol. 20, No. 1, 49-56

Farm Compost Application:

Effects on Crop Performance
T. D’Hose1, M. Cougnon2, A. De Vliegher1, K. Willekens1, E. Van Bockstaele1,2 and D. Reheul2
1. Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research ILVO, Merelbeke, Belgium
2. Department of Plant Production, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium
*E-mail contact: tommy.dhose@ilvo.vlaanderen.be

Compost application can contribute to agricultural sustainability. Municipal solid waste compost has been
the subject of most of the research done so far. Farm compost (FC) has a different composition. It is made
of varying ingredients available on the farm, e.g., wood chips and bark, manure, straw, crop residues and
surplus grass and soil. Information is currently lacking on the agronomic value and environmental impact
of FC. Therefore, a long-term field experiment was established to quantify the effect of FC application on
Downloaded by [Aston University] at 04:35 30 January 2014

crop performance and soil quality in a crop rotation of potatoes, fodder beet, forage maize and Brussels
sprouts. This paper presents the results of the first four years of the ongoing field trial. In the fourth year
of the experiment, the annual FC amendment resulted in a significant increase in dry matter yield for all
four crops. Our results suggested that the positive effect of continual FC application was based on a com-
bination of a slow release of nitrogen and providing better growing opportunities to the crops. Results on
the effect of FC on the residual nitrate content in the soil, disease suppression and DM content of the crops
are not yet decisive.

Introduction SOM, improving water holding capacity and other

physical properties of soil such as bulk density, pen-
Intensification of agriculture has increased the etration resistance and soil aggregation (Wells et al.
productivity and efficiency of agricultural systems 2000, Zebarth et al. 1999), increasing beneficial soil
over the past decades. This has led to significant in- organisms, reducing plant pathogens (Abawi and
creases in food production. However, agricultural in- Widmer 2000) and beneficial effects on the growth of
tensification can also have negative consequences a variety of plants (Atiyeh et al. 2002, Butler et al.
such as increased erosion, nutrient losses, lower soil 2009, Montemurro et al. 2006, Sarwar et al. 2008).
fertility and reduced biodiversity (Matson et al. 1997). Most of the research on compost done so far has fo-
Indeed, more frequent tillage and low inputs of or- cused on the use of municipal solid waste compost
ganic materials balanced with the use of mineral fer- (MSWC). MSWC improves plant growth. It supplies
tilizers have contributed to a general reduction in soil nutrients to plants (Togun and Akanbi 2003), affects
organic matter (SOM) content of cultivated land the levels of nutritional elements in soil (Giusquiani
worldwide (Baritz et al. 2004, Sleutel 2005, Wells et al. et al. 1998), and generally improves the soils’ physi-
2000). This reduction results in an inevitable decline in cal properties (SerraWittling et al. 1996, Sikora and
the quality of agricultural soils as a high SOM status in Yakovchenko 1996).
the topsoil is crucial for sustainable long term land Farm compost (FC) is another type of compost
use. SOM has multiple beneficial effects on soil struc- made from ingredients available on the farm. It con-
ture (e.g., water holding capacity, aeration and per- tains wood chips and bark, manure, straw, crop
meability), soil fertility, crop production and overall residues and surplus grass and soil (Leroy 2008). Or-
soil sustainability (Freixo et al. 2002, Lal and Kimble ganic farmers often use FC, and interest in FC is
1997, Madrid et al. 2007, Reeves 1997, von Lutzow et al. growing among non-organic farmers. However, in-
2002, Weil and Magdoff 2004). formation is lacking on FC’s agronomic value and
Applying compost can contribute to agricultural environmental impact. This research aims to quanti-
sustainability. Adequate use of compost with prop- fy farm compost’s effect on soil and crop quality in a
er management has been shown to have many ad- crop rotation of potatoes, fodder beet, forage maize
vantages. These advantages include adding an array and Brussels sprouts. Data were collected over a pe-
of nutrients to soils (Tejada et al. 2001), increasing riod of four years.

Compost Science & Utilization Winter 2012 49

49-56 D'Hose 3/12/12 10:02 AM Page 50

T. D’Hose, M. Cougnon, A. De Vliegher, K. Willekens, E. Van Bockstaele and D. Reheul

Materials and Methods

Soil

The experiment was conducted during 2004-2007

on a loamy sand soil at Gent University’s experimen-
tal farm in Melle (50°59’N, 03°49’E, 11m above sea lev-
el). The clay (< 2 µm), silt (2-20 µm), fine sand (20-200
µm) and coarse sand (200-2000 µm) content is 86, 116,
758 and 40 g.kg-1, respectively. The initial pH-KCl of
the soil was 6.3, and the carbon content 0.93 % (Walk-
ley and Black). Phosphate status of the soil was high
(0.22 mg P g-1 dry soil).
Weather data (average monthly temperatures, to-
tal radiation and total precipitation) of the experimen-
tal site were registered for the period 2004 – 2007.
Growing conditions were fairly close to the norm (av-
Downloaded by [Aston University] at 04:35 30 January 2014

erage values for the period 1907-2007).

Experimental Design

The experimental design was a strip-split plot

design (Gomez and Gomez 1984) with three repli-
cates. During the experimental period, crops were
the horizontal factor, fertilizer nitrogen (N) the ver-
tical factor and farm compost the subplot factor. N
and compost treatments remained fixed in location
FIGURE 1. Experimental design of the experiment. Crop alloca-
whereas the crop changed within the plots as the ro- tion is for 2004.
tation cycled through. Individual plot size was
6,5m*9m (Figure 1). Four crops were grown in the TABLE 1.
following succession: fodder beet (FB, cv. ‘Bolero’), Composition of the farm compost applied in the years
forage maize (FM, cv ‘Frenetic’ in 2004, cv ‘LG 2004-2007, expressed on dry matter (DM) basis.
32.15’ from 2005 on), Brussels sprouts (BS, cv. 2004 2005 2006 2007
‘Cyrus F1’) and potato (P, cv. ‘Escort’). Varieties Dry matter content (%) 64.9 47.3 45.9 43.6
stayed the same during the entire trial except for Organic content (%) 25.0 16.0 37.9 26.0
forage maize, as the variety ‘Frenetic’ was no longer Nutrients (mg.kg DM-1)
commercially available after 2004. Plots received 0, N 6350 6700 9880 8667
100 or 200 kg N.y-1.ha-1, applied as ammonium ni- P 1870 1450 5730 2033

trate 27% N. Plots received 0 or 50 m 3 FC y -1.ha -1; K

Ca
5175
19625
3838
4848
5950
16550
4900
17633
these are called no compost (FC0) and compost Mg 3368 1665 2800 3500
(FC1) plots, respectively. Na 4325 270 2800 300
Prior to each application, we analyzed the com- C 138667 88889 210778 144222
C:N 21.8 13.3 21.3 16.6
post. This revealed substantial differences in composi-
tion from year to year (Table 1). We strove for equal P
and K fertilization for each plot. No compost plots re- Agronomy and Data Analysis
ceived 332 kg K.ha-1.y-1 from muriate of potash (33.2 %
K). The extractable K content in the compost was com- Soil was usually tilled in mid-April. The field was
pleted with muriate of potash up to 332 kg K.ha-1.y-1 then rotary-harrowed once the soil was dry. Fertilizers
on compost plots. and farm compost were then spread by hand on the
Compost was the only phosphate source for the plots and incorporated in the soil by rotary-harrowing.
compost plots. No compost plots received triple su- Forage maize and fodder beet were sown, pota-
perphosphate (19.6 % P) in an amount equivalent to toes planted, between 20 April and the beginning of
the extractable amount applied with the farm compost May. Brussels sprouts were planted by the end of
on compost plots. May. Weeds were controlled by use of appropriate

50 Compost Science & Utilization Winter 2012

49-56 D'Hose 3/12/12 10:02 AM Page 51

Farm Compost Application: Effects on Crop Performance

herbicides. Fungicides in Brussels sprouts and potato, 40 mm, 29-35 mm and < 29 mm according to market
and insecticides in Brussels sprouts, were applied ac- categories. Each fraction was weighed separately. Fi-
cording to good agricultural practice. nally, a sample of sprouts was cut in four and dried
The forage maize was sown at 103,000 seeds/ha for 8 h at 75°C. The stems and leaves of the selected
with a row spacing distance of 0.75 m. The forage plants were chopped mechanically and a representa-
maize was harvested when the dry matter (DM) con- tive sample (about 2 kg) was dried 8h at 75°C to de-
tent of the whole plant was approximately 30%. Sub- termine DM content.
plots in the middle of the individual plots (4 rows of 2 After each harvest, all of the aboveground crop
m) were harvested manually. The ears were separated residue (potato foliage, beet leaves and the stems and
from the vegetative plant parts, and both were leaves of the Brussels sprout plants) was removed
weighed. Vegetative plant parts were chopped and a from the experimental field.
sample was dried for 12 h at 75°C. The whole ears Each year, between 1 October and 15 November,
were dried for 8 h at 75°C and for 4 h at 105°C. soil samples were taken to determine the nitrate con-
The potatoes were planted at 68 cm between the tent in the soil in the layers 0-30, 30-60 and 60-90 cm
rows and 40 cm within the rows. Two weeks before soil depth. Using a gauge auger, three samples were
harvest (in the first half of September), a herbicide was taken randomly per plot. A bulked sample was com-
applied for desiccation. Forty-five individual plants posed per treatment and analysed. These results
Downloaded by [Aston University] at 04:35 30 January 2014

from the middle of the plots (5 rows of 9 plants each) were compared with the Flemish legislative limit,
were harvested and weighed. The harvested potatoes i.e., less than 90 kg NO -N.ha-1 should be measured
3
were calibrated using a 40 mm sieve and the propor- in the soil profile up to 90 cm of depth measured be-
tion of potatoes smaller than 40 mm was calculated tween 1 October and 15 November in order to reduce
(proportion < 40 mm). From the fraction > 40 mm, 10 nitrate leaching.
tubers were randomly selected, washed, cut in pieces The nitrogen fertilizer replacement value (NFRV)
of approximately 1 cm3 and dried for 8 h at 75°C and (Bullock and Bullock 1994, Nevens 2003) of the com-
for 4 h at 105°C to obtain the DM content. A second post was calculated for each crop in each year. The
sample of 5 kg was selected and washed to calculate minimum adequate model was used to describe the
the soil tare and to measure the underwater weight DM yield response to applied mineral N and the
(UWW). The latter sample was also used to determine NFRV was determined by solving for x in the no com-
the infection by common scab (Streptomyces scabies). In post yield response curve, at y equalling to the crop
2005 and 2006 some potatoes were affected by black yield on N-unfertilized compost amended plots. This
scurf (Rhizoctonia solani). The proportion of infected NFRV determines the amount of mineral fertilizer N
potatoes was calculated (proportion scurf). After har- that should be applied on a plot without compost to
vesting the potatoes, a cover crop (Italian Ryegrass) reach an equal DM yield as on a compost plot. Besides
was sown at a density of 40 kg/ha. The cover crop was the NFRV of the compost, we examined the possibili-
destroyed mechanically in the following spring. ty of a non-N contribution effect of the compost. To es-
Fodder beet was sown at 50 cm between the rows timate this effect, we noted the yield (or other para-
and 5 cm within the rows. Later, the number of plants meter) bonus for the crops growing on a compost
was brought to approximately 85,000 beets/ha. At the enriched soil under non-N limiting circumstances (i.e.,
end of October, 10 rows of 2 m were harvested manu- at high mineral N fertilizer rates). This non-N contri-
ally from the middle of the plots. The beets were sep- bution effect may be due to healthier plant roots, bet-
arated from the foliage, and both were weighed. Ten ter soil structure, a sounder soil food web, etc.
beets and their foliage were randomly selected. Those Statistical analyses were performed using R. When
10 beets were washed to determine the soil tare, and a the effect of compost on the yield or a quality parame-
lengthwise section was cut from both the beets and ter of a specific crop was analysed in a specific year, the
their foliage, then both were dried. Beets were dried experiment was analysed as a split-plot design with N
for 8 h at 75°C and for 4 h at 105°C; foliage was dried as main plot factor and FC as subplot factor.
for 8h at 75°C. Before performing ANOVA, the assumptions for
Brussels sprout plants (2-leaf stage) were planted ANOVA (equal variances and normal distribution)
at 68 cm between the rows and 40 cm within the rows. were checked. An ARCSINE transformation (y’= 2*
At the end of November, 25 plants from the middle of arcsin[sqrt(y)]) was applied on data expressing a pro-
the plots were harvested and weighed. The sprouts of portion before performing ANOVA.
10 randomly selected plants were separated from the A quadratic model was used to describe the DM
stems and leaves and were weighed separately. These yield response to applied mineral N when calculating
sprouts were sorted in four classes, i.e., > 40 mm, 35- the NFRVs. Regressions were also performed using R.

Compost Science & Utilization Winter 2012 51

49-56 D'Hose 3/12/12 10:02 AM Page 52

T. D’Hose, M. Cougnon, A. De Vliegher, K. Willekens, E. Van Bockstaele and D. Reheul

TABLE 2.
Tuber DM yield of potato (P), total DM yield of forage maize (FM), beet DM yield of fodder beet (FB)
and sprout DM yield of Brussels sprouts (BS). All yields are expressed as kg.ha-1.
N 2004 2005 2006 2007
Crop (kg.ha-1)
FC0 FC1 FC0 FC1 FC0 FC1 FC0 FC1

0 8548 10129 8436 7563 8863 7915 11664 12658

P 100 12287 12974 10860 10353 9888 10353 12688 13533
200 14353 15031 12618 12934 11649 11949 13871 15419
mean 11729 12711 10638 10283 10133 10072 12741 13870

Statistical significance N *** (L) ** (L) ** (L) * (L)

FC ns ns ns *

0 21006 18947 18979 20323 14851 14770 17097 19350

FM 100 25146 24638 21287 22435 20169 20823 21276 22457
200 26049 27520 24279 24620 21501 21502 21617 23751
mean 24067 23702 21515 22459 18841 19032 19997 21853

Statistical significance N *** (L) ** (L) ** (L) * (L)

FC ns ns ns *
Downloaded by [Aston University] at 04:35 30 January 2014

0 17367 19967 13363 14160 14167 15148 11390 13284

FB 100 21951 23196 19187 18334 18178 19395 17737 19138
200 22372 23140 18009 20016 17739 18431 19858 20372
mean 20564 22101 16853 17503 16695 17658 16328 17598

Statistical significance N ** (L) *** (Q) ** (Q) *** (Q)

FC ns ns ns *

0 2869 3252 2645 2275 1998 1891 1474 1785

BS 100 4532 4700 4878 4700 3406 3133 3333 3942
200 5554 5126 6076 6541 5306 5168 5202 5259
mean 4318 4359 4533 4506 3570 3397 3336 3662

N ** (L) * (L) *** (L) *** (L)

Statistical significance
FC ns ns ns *
ns, *, **, *** indicates non-significant (ns) or significant at the 5% (*), 1% (**) or 0.1 % (*** ) levels, respectively. (L) = linear effect, (Q) = quadratic effect. No
significant N*FC interaction occurred in none of the years.

Results TABLE 3.
The effect of farm compost application on tuber
Effect of Farm Compost on DM Yields DM yield of potato (P), total DM yield of forage maize
(FM), beet DM yield of fodder beet (FB) and sprout
Table 2 shows DM yield of the potato tubers, forage DM yield of Brussels sprouts (BS) expressed as percent
maize, sprouts of Brussels sprouts and beet of fodder of the yield of the FC0 treatments.
beet. There was no effect of compost application on the Crop
-1
N (kg.ha ) 2004 2005 2006 2007
DM yield in 2004, 2005 and 2006, but the effect of FC P 0 18.5 -10.4 -10.7 8.5
was significant for all crops in 2007. As expected, the ef- 100 5.6 -4.7 4.7 6.7
fect of N was significant in every year for all crops. 200 4.7 2.5 2.6 11.2
Table 3 illustrates the yield increase or decrease on mean 8.4 -3.3 -0.6 8.9
compost plots expressed as a percentage of the no FM 0 -9.8 7.1 -0.5 13.2
compost plots. A mean yield decrease is noticed in 100 -2.0 5.4 3.2 5.6
200 5.6 1.4 0.0 9.9
2004 for forage maize and for Brussels sprouts and
mean -1.5 4.4 1.0 9.3
potato in 2005 and 2006. In 2007, values for every crop
FB 0 15.0 6.0 6.9 16.6
and every nitrogen fertilizer level became positive. 100 5.7 -4.4 6.7 7.9
200 3.4 11.1 3.9 2.6
Effect of Farm Compost on DM Content of the Crops mean 7.5 3.9 5.8 7.8
BS 0 13.4 -14.0 -5.4 21.1
Compost had a significantly positive effect on DM 100 3.7 -3.6 -8.0 18.3
content and underwater weight (UWW) of potato in 200 -7.7 7.7 -2.6 1.1
mean 0.9 -0.6 -4.8 9.8
2004 and 2007. For 2004 and 2007, the DM content was

52 Compost Science & Utilization Winter 2012

49-56 D'Hose 3/12/12 10:02 AM Page 53

Farm Compost Application: Effects on Crop Performance

19.6% (FC0) vs. 20.9% (FC1) and 19.8% (FC0) vs. 20.7% 2007 where the quadratic model was used. The values
(FC1), respectively; UWW in 2004 and 2007 was 357 g.5 show high variability between the four crops and be-
kg-1 (FC0) vs. 381 g.5 kg-1 (FC1) and 349 g.5 kg-1 (FC0) tween the different seasons. In some cases NFRVs are
vs. 362 g.5 kg-1 (FC1) respectively. N had a significant even negative, indicating that the compost application
lowering effect on DM content and UWW in 2005. reduced yield in comparison with unamended plots.
In 2007, NFRV’s are positive for the four crops with
Effect of Farm Compost on the potato showing the highest value.
Residual Nitrate Content in the Soil
Effect of Farm Compost on Potato Diseases
The residual nitrate content in the soil mostly did
not fulfil the assumption of equality of variances and FC had no significant effect on either proportion
normality needed to perform ANOVA. The nitrate of potatoes affected by common scab or the propor-
residue was mostly below the Flemish legislative lim- tion of potatoes affected by black scurf.
it of 90 kg NO3-N/ha for all treatments. In 2005 this
limit was exceeded for all potato plots and for some Effect of Farm Compost on Potato Size
Brussels sprouts objects but no consistent effect of
farm compost could be observed. Within the same The calibration of the potato tuber yield is pre-
Downloaded by [Aston University] at 04:35 30 January 2014

year, and within the same crop, the effect was some- sented in Table 5.
times positive and sometimes negative. The effect of N on the size of potatoes was clearly
positive, and was significant in 2004, 2006 and 2007.
Nitrogen Fertilizer Replacement Value (NFRV) The effect of compost was significant and resulted in a
of Farm Compost higher proportion of < 40 mm potatoes in 2004 and
2006. The inverse effect was observed in 2007: a sig-
The calculated NFRVs of the farm compost for the nificantly lower proportion of < 40 mm potatoes was
four crops, derived from the DM yield response observed on the compost plots.
curves are given in Table 4. For most crop x year com-
binations, the minimum adequate model was the lin- Effect of Compost on Soil Tare of Beet
ear model except for fodder beet in 2005, 2006 and
No significant effect for N or FC could be detected
TABLE 4. in any of the four years.
Nitrogen fertilizer replacement values (kg.ha-1) and
standard errors of farm compost for different crops during Discussion
the period 2004-2007.
Potato Fodder Beet Forage Maize Brussels Sprouts The characteristics and quality of the compost dif-
fered according to the components used and their pro-
2004 44.9 ± 17.6 (L) 76.2 ± 64.5 (L) -103.1 ± 6.8 (L) 20.6 ± 27.6 (L)
portions. The total N concentration of the compost
2005 -47.1 ± 50.2 (L) -1.2 ± 20.9 (Q) 55.0 ± 34.7 (L) -31.6 ± 5.8 (L)
2006 -59.2 ± 6.2 (L) 13.4 ± 36.5 (Q) -56.3 ± 28.5 (L) -1.6 ± 12.5 (L)
ranged from about 3.2 g/kg of fresh weight to about
2007 131.2 ± 24.8 (L) 28.1 ± 2.2 (Q) 71.4 ± 42.4 (L) 16.7 ± 9.6 (L)
4.5 g/kg fresh weight (Table 1). These are rather low
values in comparison with local Flemish reference val-
(L) = linear model, (Q) = quadratic model

TABLE 5.
Proportion of potato tuber yield falling through a 40 mm sieve during the period 2004-2007.
2004 2005 2006 2007
-1
N (kg.ha ) FC0 FC1 FC0 FC1 FC0 FC1 FC0 FC1
0 14.5 17.6 12.0 15.5 12.1 20.4 7.8 5.5
100 9.8 12.5 11.2 14.4 8.8 8.8 7.0 5.8
200 8.0 9.5 13.3 13.1 8.1 9.0 6.9 4.9
Mean 10.8 13.2 12.2 14.3 9.7 12.7 7.2 5.4

Statistical Significance
N * (L) ns * (L) * (L)
FC * ns * *

ns, * indicates non-significant (ns) or significant at the 5% (*) level, respectively. (L) = linear effect. No significant N*FC interaction occurred in none of the
years.

Compost Science & Utilization Winter 2012 53

49-56 D'Hose 3/12/12 10:02 AM Page 54

T. D’Hose, M. Cougnon, A. De Vliegher, K. Willekens, E. Van Bockstaele and D. Reheul

ues of 7 to 12 g of total N/kg of fresh compost weight the VFG-compost (which is a more nutrient rich com-
(Anonymous 2010). The average organic matter con- post) in Nevens’ experiment. After all, Janssen (1996)
tent (13.1% of fresh weight) was below the Belgian showed that the net mineralization of substances lin-
federal reference value (16% of fresh weight). The C:N early decreased with increasing C:N ratio of the or-
ratio of compost affects the decomposition rate, the in- ganic material. So the negative NFRVs in the first
field mineralization and the amount of nutrients re- years of the experiment can be explained by the high
leased by the compost (Singh 1987). It is common C:N ratio of the farm compost. We observed no corre-
knowledge that the application of organic material lation between the C:N ratio of the farm compost and
with a high C:N ratio reduces plant available N owing the size of the NFRVs, probably due to the large vari-
to an enhanced assimilation of microbial N following ability of the NFRVs.
the high import of organic matter with compost (Crec- In 2007, the effect of compost amendment on crop
chio et al. 2004). In compost with low C:N values, a yield became significant, illustrating that farm com-
small percentage of compost total N, usually 5 to 15%, post amendments can increase crop yields over time.
becomes plant-available during the first year after ap- As the weather data (precipitation, irradiation and
plication (Dick and McCoy 1993, Sikora and Szmidt temperature) for 2007 were comparable with the pre-
2001, Tester 1989). An optimal C:N ratio is difficult to vious years, the climatic conditions were very unlike-
define but Eriksen et al. (1999) mentioned a reference ly to have differently influenced the yield compared to
Downloaded by [Aston University] at 04:35 30 January 2014

range of 9 to 15. As the C:N ratio of the applied farm previous years. Indeed, the continuous application of
compost in our experiment (on average 18.2) exceed- compost is expected to result in considerable amounts
ed this reference range, negative yield effects owing to of residual organic N which contribute to the accumu-
high N immobilization could be expected. lation of organic N in the soil (Sörensen and Amato
In 2004, the compost effect on the DM was not sig- 2002) and consequently to its fertilizer N value on the
nificant. This is in accordance with findings of Nevens longer term (Whalen et al. 2001). This was confirmed
(2003), who reported that compost supplies less avail- by positive NFRVs for all crops in 2007. The value for
able N to the plants during the first season after appli- potato was particularly high (153 kg N/ha), which
cation than inorganic mineral fertilizers. Furthermore, may explain the positive effect of farm compost on
a negative NFRV for forage maize was observed potato size in 2007, since it is well known that the
(Table 3) which may be attributed to high N-immobi- amount of N positively influences potato size (Arse-
lization as indicated by Elliot et al. (1981) and Crecchio nault et al. 2001).
et al. (2004). However, Naeini and Cook (2000) regis- Averaged over the four crops, the DM yield bene-
tered an increase of the dry matter yield of forage fit of farm compost in 2007 was 14.9, 9.6, and 6.2% at
maize in the first year following compost (C:N ratio: additional mineral N fertilization levels of 0, 100 and
8.5) application. It is therefore important to keep in 200 kg N/ha, respectively (TABLE 3). The continually
mind that variations in compost composition, C:N ra- positive effect at the highest N rate indicates that the
tio, soil type, pH and climatic conditions will influ- positive yield effect of the farm compost was not only
ence the rate of N-mineralization and crop response. a N-contribution effect. This contradicts the findings
Significant positive yield effects from compost of de Kok (1996) and de Haan and Lubbers (1984),
were still lacking in 2005 and 2006. On the contrary, who concluded that compost’s positive crop yield ef-
TABLE 3 shows that the application of compost led to fects could be explained merely as nitrogen effects.
a mean yield decrease for Brussels sprouts and potato. However, our findings suggest that a yearly compost
This is also reflected in negative NFRVs in 2005 and application not only supplies extra N, it also offers bet-
2006 (Table 4). In other words, upon application of ter growing opportunities to the crop, probably by
farm compost, additional mineral N fertilization was changing the physical (water uptake, aeration,…),
required to reach the same crop yields as in conditions chemical (organic matter content, pH,...) and biologi-
where no such compost was amended. These findings cal properties (enhanced soil food web) of the soil.
contradict Nevens (2003), who found a significant in- In 2004 and 2007, compost application increased the
crease in crop yield of forage maize in the second year DM percentage of potato. Since also NFRVs for potato
after VFG-compost (vegetable, fruit and garden waste were positive in 2004 and 2007 (TABLE 3) one might
compost) application. His response suggests an in- presume that the higher DM percentage might be an N-
crease in plant-available N mineralization owing to effect. However, Leroy (2008) suggested a higher DM
the compost applied in the previous year. This is clear- content when nutrient availability is limited.
ly not the case in our experiment, most probably be- In our experiment, farm compost did not show a
cause of the rather high C:N ratio of the farm compost significant effect on the presence of common scab and
in comparison with the C:N ratio (on average 10.2) of black scurf on potato. The potato variety ‘Escort’ has a

54 Compost Science & Utilization Winter 2012

49-56 D'Hose 3/12/12 10:02 AM Page 55

Farm Compost Application: Effects on Crop Performance

low to medium resistance to common scab (Europota- Atiyeh, R.M., Lee, S., Edwards, C.A., Arancon, N.Q. and
to 2010), so the non-effect of the compost cannot be at- Metzger, J.D. 2002. The influence of humic acids derived
tributed only to the resistance of the variety. Disease from earthworm-processed organic wastes on plant
growth. Bioresource Technology, 84 (1): 7-14.
suppressive conditions have been obtained in soils af- Baritz, R., De Neve, S., Barancikova, G., Gronlund, A.,
ter addition of certain composts. This has been true in Leifeld, J., Katzensteiner, K., Koch, H.-J.P.C., Romanya, J.
production systems in greenhouses (Hoitink and and Schaminee, J. 2004. Land use practices and SOM. Van
Boehm 1999) and under field conditions (Keener et al. Camp, L., Bujarrabal, B., Gentile, A.R., Jones, R.J.A., Mon-
2000). Lumsden et al. (1986) suggested that both in- tanarella, L., Olazabal, C., and Selvaradjou, S.-K. (Eds).
Reports of the technical working groups established un-
creased soil microbial activity and the high concentra- der the thematic strategy for soil protection. EUR 21319
tion of some organic components (i.e., acetic, propi- EN/3, Office for Official Publications of the European
onic, isobutyric, butyric and isovaleric acids) caused Communities, Luxembourg, pp. 439-465.
the suppression of soil-borne pathogens. Conn and Bullock, D.G. and Bullock, D.S. 1994. Quadratic and qua-
Lazarovits (1999) reported a significant reduction in dratic-plus-plateau models for predicting optimal nitro-
gen rate of corn - a comparison. Agronomy Journal, 86 (1):
potato scab and black scurf after the application of dif-
191-195.
ferent types of manure. However, there has been no Butler, T.J., Weindorf, D.C., Han, K.J. and Muir, J.P. 2009.
definitive work linking biological control in soil to ap- Dairy manure compost quality effects on corn silage and
plications of organic amendments. Furthermore, the soil properties. Compost Science & Utilization, 17 (1): 18-24.
Downloaded by [Aston University] at 04:35 30 January 2014

quality and composition of compost cannot be stan- Conn, K.L. and Lazarovits, G. 1999. Impact of animal ma-
nures on verticillium wilt, potato scab, and soil microbial
dardized. The effect of organic amendments on dis-
populations. Canadian Journal Of Plant Pathology, 21 (1):
ease control is thus highly variable. Erhart et al. (1999) 81-92.
tested 19 different types of compost (MSWC, bark Crecchio, C., Curci, M., Pizzigallo, M.D.R., Ricciuti, P. and
compost, and several others) for suppression of Pythi- Ruggiero, P. 2004. Effects of municipal solid waste com-
um ultimum. Only one type of compost was strongly post amendments on soil enzyme activities and bacterial
suppressive, while the others were mildly suppressive genetic diversity. Soil Biology & Biochemistry, 36 (10):
1595-1605.
or even conducive. De Haan, S. and Lubbers, J. 1984. Huisvuilcompost en zuiver-
ingsslib als organische meststoffen voor bouwlandge-
Conclusions wassen op een zware rivierkleigrond in de Bommeler-
waard, in vergelijking met stalmest, groenbemesting en
turfmolm (Refuse compost and sewage sludge as organic
Benefits of an annual high-rate farm compost ap-
manures for arable crops on a heavy fluviatile clay in the
plication on crop yield became significant after the Bommelerwaard, compared with farmyard manure, green
fourth annual application. The positive effect of con- manure and peat moss). Rapport nr 15-84, Instituut voor
tinual compost amendment is attributed both to a Bodemvruchtbaarheid, Haren, The Netherlands, pp. 47.
slow-release of N and to non-nitrogen effects. Influ- De Kok, V.P.H.M. 1996. De gebruikswaarde van GFT-com-
ences of farm compost on the residual nitrate content post in de akkerbouw en groenteteelt in de vollegrond.
(Effects of urban organic waste compost on yield and
in the soil, disease suppression and DM content of the quality of arable crops and vegetables and on the behav-
crops are not yet conclusive. iour of nitrogen in the soil). Publicatie nr 225, Proefsta-
This experiment is still ongoing. We will continue tion voor de Akkerbouw en de Groenteteelt in de Volle-
to test crop performance and link it to physical, chem- grond (PAGV), Lelystad, The Netherlands, pp. 44.
ical and biological characteristics of the soil. Dick, W.A. and McCoy, E.L. 1993. Enhancing soil fertility by
addition of compost. Hoitink, H.A.J. and Keener, H.M.
(Eds). Science and Engineering of Composting. Renais-
References sance publications, Worthington, OH, pp. 622-644.
Elliot, L., Cochran, V.L. and Papendick, R.I. 1981. Wheat
Abawi, G.S. and Widmer, T.L. 2000. Impact of soil health residues and nitrogen placement effects on wheat growth
management practices on soilborne pathogens, nema- in green house. Soil Science, 131 (48-52.
todes and root diseases of vegetable crops. Applied Soil Erhart, E., Burian, K., Hartl, W. and Stich, K. 1999. Suppres-
Ecology, 15 (1): 37-47. sion of Pythium ultimum by biowaste composts in relation
Anonymous. 2010. Compost en het mestdecreet. Alles wat je to compost microbial biomass, activity and content of
moet weten over compostgebruik in de land- en tuin- phenolic compounds. Journal Of Phytopathology, 147 (5):
bouw. (in Dutch). Compost and the Flemish manure de- 299-305.
cree. Everything you should know about the use of com- Eriksen, G.N., Coale, F.J. and Bollero, G.A. 1999. Soil nitro-
post in agriculture and horticulture. Vlaco, Mechelen, gen dynamics and maize production in municipal solid
Belgium. waste amended soil. Agronomy Journal, 91 (6): 1009-1016.
Arsenault, W.J., LeBlanc, D.A., Tai, G.C.C. and Boswall, P. Europotato. The European Cultivated Potato Database (va-
2001. Effects of nitrogen application and seedpiece spac- riety: Escort). http://www.europotato.org/display_de-
ing on yield and tuber size distribution in eight potato cul- scription.php?variety_name=Escort. Consulted on 19-
tivars. American Journal Of Potato Research, 78 (4): 301-309. 11-2010.

Compost Science & Utilization Winter 2012 55

49-56 D'Hose 3/12/12 10:02 AM Page 56

T. D’Hose, M. Cougnon, A. De Vliegher, K. Willekens, E. Van Bockstaele and D. Reheul

Freixo, A.A., Machado, P.L.O.D., dos Santos, H.P., Silva, Ibrahim, M. and Safdar, E. 2008. Improvement of soil
C.A. and Fadigas, F.D. 2002. Soil organic carbon and frac- physical and chemical properties with compost applica-
tions of a Rhodic Ferralsol under the influence of tillage tion in rice-wheat cropping system. Pakistan Journal of
and crop rotation systems in southern Brazil. Soil & Botany, 40 (1): 275-282.
Tillage Research, 64 (3-4): 221-230. SerraWittling, C., Houot, S. and Barriuso, E. 1996. Modifica-
Giusquiani, P.L., Concezzi, L., Businelli, M. and Macchioni, tion of soil water retention and biological properties by
A. 1998. Fate of pig sludge liquid fraction in calcareous municipal solid waste compost. Compost Science & Uti-
soil: agricultural and environmental implications. Journal lization, 4 (1): 44-52.
Of Environmental Quality, 27 (2): 364-371. Sikora, L.J. and Yakovchenko, V. 1996. Soil organic matter
Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. (Eds). 1984. Statistical Proce- mineralization after compost amendment. Soil Science So-
dures For Agricultural Research, Second Edition. A Wi- ciety Of America Journal, 60 (5): 1401-1404.
ley-Interscience Publication, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Sikora, L.J. and Szmidt, R.A.K. 2001. Nitrogen sources, min-
Chichester, UK, p. 680. eralization rates, and nitrogen nutrition benefits to plants
Hoitink, H.A.J. and Boehm, M.J. 1999. Biocontrol within the from composts. Stoffella P.J. and Kahn B.A. (Eds). Com-
context of soil microbial communities: a substrate-depen- post utilization in horticultural cropping systems. Lewis
dent phenomenon. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 47, Publ., Boca Raton, FL., pp. 287-305.
427-446. Singh, C.P. 1987. Preparation of high-grade compost by an
Janssen, B.H. 1996. Nitrogen mineralization in relation to enrichment technique. 1. Effect of enrichment on organic-
C:N ratio and decomposability of organic materials. Plant matter decomposition. Biological Agriculture & Horticul-
and Soil, 181 (1): 39-45. ture, 5 (1): 41-49.
Downloaded by [Aston University] at 04:35 30 January 2014

Keener, H.M., Dick, W.A. and Hoitink, H.A.J. 2000. Compost- Sleutel S. 2005. Carbon sequestration in cropland soils: re-
ing and beneficial utilization of composted by-product cent evolution and potential of alternative management
materials. Power J.F.et al (Eds). Beneficial uses of agricul- options. PhD thesis, Ghent University, Gent, Belgium.
tural, industrial and municipal by-products. Soil Science Sörensen, P. and Amato, M. 2002. Remineralisation and
Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 315-341. residual effects of N after application of pig slurry to soil.
Lal, R. and Kimble, J.M. 1997. Conservation tillage for car- European Journal of Agronomy, 16 (2): 81-95.
bon sequestration. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 49 Tejada, M., Dobao, M.M., Benitez, C. and Gonzalez, J.L.
(1-3): 243-253. 2001. Study of composting of cotton residues. Bioresource
Leroy B. 2008. Soil food web, C and N transformations and Technology, 79 (2): 199-202.
soil structure: interactions and feedback mechanisms as a Tester, C.F. 1989. Tall fescue growth in greenhouse, growth
function of the quality of exogenous organic matter. PhD chamber, and field plots amended with sewage-sludge
thesis, Ghent University, Gent, p. 246. compost and fertilizer. Soil Science, 148 (6): 452-458.
Lumsden, R.D., Millner, P.D. and Lewis, J.A. 1986. Suppres- Togun, A.O. and Akanbi, W.B. 2003. Comparative effective-
sion of lettuce drop caused by sclerotinia-minor with ness of organic-based fertilizer to mineral fertilizer on
composted sewage-sludge. Plant Disease, 70 (3): 197-201. tomato growth and fruit yield. Compost Science & Utiliza-
Madrid, F., Lopez, R. and Cabrera, F. 2007. Metal accumula- tion, 11 (4): 337-342.
tion in soil after application of municipal solid waste von Lutzow, M., Leifeld, J., Kainz, M., Kogel-Knabner, I. and
compost under intensive farming conditions. Agriculture Munch, J.C. 2002. Indications for soil organic matter qual-
Ecosystems & Environment, 119 (3-4): 249-256. ity in soils under different management. Geoderma, 105
Matson, P.A., Parton, W.J., Power, A.G. and Swift, M.J. 1997. (3-4): 243-258.
Agricultural intensification and ecosystem properties. Weil, R. and Magdoff, F. 2004. Significance of soil organic
Science, 277 (5325): 504-509. matter to soil quality and health. Magdoff, F. and Weil, R.
Montemurro, F., Maiorana, M., Convertini, G. and Ferri, D. (Eds). Soil organic matter in sustainable agriculture. CRC
2006. Compost organic amendments in fodder crops: ef- Press, Boca Raton, pp. 1-58.
fects on yield, nitrogen utilization and soil characteristics. Wells, A.T., Chan, K.Y. and Cornish, P.S. 2000. Comparison of
Compost Science & Utilization, 14 (2): 114-123. conventional and alternative vegetable farming systems
Naeini, S.A.R.M. and Cook, H.F. 2000. Influence of munici- on the properties of a yellow earth in New South Wales.
pal compost on temperature, water, nutrient status and Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 80 (1-2): 47-60.
the yield of maize in a temperate soil. Soil Use and Man- Whalen, J., Chang, C. and Olson, B. 2001. Nitrogen and
agement, 16 (3): 215-221. phosphorus mineralization potentials of soils receiving
Nevens F. 2003. Nitrogen use efficiency in grassland, silage repeated annual cattle manure applications. Biology and
maize and ley/arable rotations. PhD thesis, Ghent Uni- Fertility of Soils, 34 (5): 334-341.
versity, Gent, p. 231. Zebarth, B.J., Neilsen, G.H., Hogue, E. and Neilsen, D. 1999.
Reeves, D.W. 1997. The role of soil organic matter in main- Influence of organic waste amendments on selected soil
taining soil quality in continuous cropping systems. Soil physical and chemical properties. Canadian Journal of Soil
& Tillage Research, 43 (1-2): 131-167. Science, 79 (3): 501-504.
Sarwar, G., Schmeisky, H., Hussain, N., Muhammad, S.,

56 Compost Science & Utilization Winter 2012