Chapter 4.10: Difference between revisions

From Farmpedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "<div> <div class="title"><h3>4.9- Improving Biofertilizer Application for Smallholder Farmers using Pivot Bio Nitrogen Fixing Bacteria on Maize (Corn)Crops</h3><br><h3 class="ch-owner">Jessica Desouza, University of Guelph, Canada</h3></div> <div class="hero-img-2"> 300px <p>Suggested citation for this chapter.</p> <p> Desouza,J. (2022) Improving Biofertilizer Application for Smallholder Farmers using Pivot Bio Nitrogen Fixing Bacteria on Maize...")
 
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
<div>
<div>
  <div class="title"><h3>4.9- Improving Biofertilizer Application for Smallholder Farmers using Pivot Bio Nitrogen Fixing Bacteria on Maize (Corn)Crops</h3><br><h3 class="ch-owner">Jessica Desouza, University of Guelph, Canada</h3></div>
  <div class="title"><h3>4.10 - Livestock sheds and collecting urine to add to manure</h3><br><h3 class="ch-owner">Jaime Selinger, University of Guelph, Canada</h3></div>
<div class="hero-img-2">
<div class="hero-img-2">
[[File:4.9 image.jpeg|300px]]
[[File:4.10.jpeg|300px]]
<p><i>Source:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Compost_site_germany.JPG</i></p>
<p>Suggested citation for this chapter.</p>
<p>Suggested citation for this chapter.</p>
<p> Desouza,J. (2022) Improving Biofertilizer Application for Smallholder Farmers using Pivot Bio Nitrogen Fixing Bacteria on Maize (Corn)  Crops. In Farmpedia, The Encyclopedia for Small Scale Farmers. Editor, M.N. Raizada, University of Guelph, Canada. http://www.farmpedia.org</p>
<p>Selinger,J. (2022) Livestock sheds and collecting urine to add to manure. In Farmpedia, The Encyclopedia for Small Scale Farmers. Editor, M.N. Raizada, University of Guelph, Canada. http://www.farmpedia.org</p>
</div>
</div>
  <div class="ch-navber" style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between;">
  <div class="ch-navber" style="display: flex; justify-content: space-between;">
  <div class="center-side" style="max-width: 100%;margin-right: 3%;">
  <div class="center-side" style="max-width: 100%;margin-right: 3%;">
       <div style="margin-top: 30px;">
       <div style="margin-top: 30px;">
       <h1 class="title-bg">The Importance of Nitrogen to Maize Crops</h1>
       <h1 class="title-bg">Introduction</h1>
         <div class="cont-bg">
         <div class="cont-bg">
           <p>The application of nitrogen fertilizer is critical to the growth and reproduction of crops as it is a building block for chlorophyll (Maathuis, 2009; Pérez-Montaño et al., 2014). Nitrogen fertilizer production requires natural gas, increasing global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions which exacerbate the climate crisis (Snyder et al., 2009)  .  Furthermore, applying too little or too much nitrogen can disturb a healthy crop. Nitrogen-deficient soil will stunt the growth of crops, significantly reducing crop yield (Pérez-Montaño et al., 2014). Due to heavy rains, the potential for nitrogen leaching in the tropics is highly probable. This is worsened  by decreased soil organic matter within the soil which would otherwise bind and retain applied nitrogen fertilizer (Harter, 2002). Low soil organic matter is especially problematic in the dry subtropics of Africa and South Asia, as low rainfall cannot support the yield of many crops  (Erenstein et al., 2012). Tropical soils are also acidic, which prevent the uptake of nitrogen (Koutika et al., 2014). Since the majority of global malnutrition occurs in the tropics and subtropics (Mata, 1975), the need for a nitrogen amendment that directly functions on the plant root surface is warranted in these regions (Jones & Jacobsen, 2005). Conversely, nitrogen applied in excess is known to degrade soil, surrounding waterways, and the atmosphere (Walling & Vaneeckhaute, 2020). Nitrogen in excess can be released into the atmosphere as nitrous oxide (N2O) – a potent GHG  that contributes to the climate change crisis (Walling & Vaneeckhaute, 2020). Nitrogen from traditional methods such as manuring can runoff and leach, contributing to the emission of N2O into the atmosphere (Walling & Vaneeckhaute, 2020). The potential contamination of drinking water supplies with excess nitrate is also a concern (Sharpley et al., 1998). Developing countries often lack the infrastructure to purify drinking water in rural areas (Sharpley et al., 1998). Excess synthetic nitrogen fertilizer can lead to the acidification of both the soil and water, thereby prohibiting the growth of crops such as maize (Olson & Sander, 1988). According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO, 2017), sub-Saharan African smallholder farmers were anticipated to use 2,201,000 tonnes of nitrogen annually. Globally, 118,763,000 tonnes of nitrogen are anticipated to be used on farms to increase crop yields and maintain healthy crop growth annually. Therefore, sub-Saharan African smallholder farmers potentially utilize approximately 2% of the global supply of nitrogen fertilizers per year. This low usage may be due to the high energy costs associated with the production of nitrogen fertilizer, reducing accessibility to the highly sought-after amendment. A technology that delivers nitrogen directly to the root surface in a sustainable and affordable  manner will significantly decrease the negative consequences posed by insufficient or excess application of this important macronutrient.</p>
           <p>The soils of smallholder farmers often lack the proper amount of nitrogen, phosphate and potassium which are essential for healthy and bountiful growth of crops. Urine collected from livestock and humans is very rich in nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium which is important for plant growth. A family of four can produce the equivalent of a 50 kg bag of NPK fertilizer from urine alone every year (Feineigle 2011). This urine has a 10:1:4 ratio of NPK which is a higher nitrogen content than many mineral fertilizers (Feineigle 2011). Humans produce roughly 500 litres of urine and 50 litres of faeces per person per year (Caldwell & Rosemarin 2014). These contain about 4 kg of nitrogen, 0.5 kg of phosphorous and 1 kg of potassium, the three basic elements for plant growth. The exact amount varies from region to region depending on food intake. Seventy per cent of the nutrients excreted by humans are in the urine fraction (Caldwell & Rosemarin 2014). Livestock consumption of leguminous fodder such as Acacia, Calliandra and Erythrina can increase the nitrogen content of their urine (Devendra 1992). </p>
 
          <p>Since the most prominent nutrient found in urine is nitrogen, it is important to have balanced nitrogen levels in urine that is mixed with manure and to balance urine addition with other nutrients required for plant growth. The importance of nitrogen to plant growth is outlined in Chapter 1.4 – Balanced Fertilization. Using urine as a way to enrich manure is a more cost-effective substitute for fertilizer. </p>
 
          <p>In areas where there is not as much livestock, human urine can also be added to crops as noted above. Akpan et al. (2012) recently demonstrated that human urine is strongly alkaline and contains a moderate amount of nutrients (N, P, K, Mg, Ca and Na). Application of either urine or inorganic fertilizer significantly (P<0.05) increased plant nutrient uptake compared with the control (Akpan-Idiok et al. 2012). Human or livestock urine can also be used directly in home gardens.</p>
</div>
</div>
  </div>
  </div>
  <div style="margin-top: 30px;">
      <h3 class="title-bg">How the practice is conducted</h3>
        <div class="cont-bg">
          <p>Urine can be collected from livestock using a concrete floor that is sloped toward a PVC pipe that empties into a manure pit. This pipe leads to a pit or inside a mud/stone wall where it is stored. The mixture is then transferred from the storage area and spread along the soil where the crops are to grow. An alternative to this process is that the urine pipe leads to a storage drum from which urine can be added to the manure. These practices require time and effort from the household. Building a concrete floor with a slope towards a PVC pipe would cost a total of $12 USD in materials and would require up to 3 days of construction labour (Sustainable Soil Management Programme 2007). A smallholder farmer can undertake this labour, but it requires specialized knowledge and training (e.g. how to mix concrete). The construction of this can be done by digging a manure pi within the livestock shed in which the urine will be emptied into (SSMP 2007). Then, the smallholder farmer will have to make a floor at the bottom of the shed where the urine will be collected out of a compact of soil or clay, or cement if they are able to afford it (SSMP 2007). Other costs for this would be a collection devise for the urine after it is disposed into the manure pit (SSMP 2007). </p>
<p>There is an easier alternative to collecting urine from livestock, specifically by penning the livestock in a certain area where crops will grow prior to planting so that their urine and feces will directly mix with the soil (Bedford et al. 2016). The animals are able to graze the land and release urine and feces and are able to comfortably move around the land rather than be restricted (Bedford et al. 2016). This process requires little labour on the part of the farming household.</p>
<p>The urine of the livestock is collected within the livestock shed. It is suggested that the livestock shed be created out of fabric as it provides more ventilation and filtration for sheds in hot climates and is more cost-effective for smallholder farmers and industrial farmers alike (Megadome Buildings 2016). As resources are sometimes limited for smallholder farmers, the fabric livestock shed will work as long as they have constructed a proper concrete floor and slope towards the manure pit.</p>
<p>This is not a new concept and has been utilized by many smallholder farmers. In a study conducted by Powell & Williams (1996) in the West African Sahel, the yield was compared over the course of six years using urine from livestock as fertilizer compared to chemical fertilizer. The authors found that there was a 52% increase in yields within the first year of the study (Powell & Williams 1996). </p>
    </div>
  </div>
  <div style="margin-top: 30px;">
  <div style="margin-top: 30px;">
       <h1 class="title-bg">Pivot Bio Nitrogen-Fixing Bacteria: A Viable Solution to a Lack of Soil Nitrogen </h1>
       <h3 class="title-bg">Ammonia Emissions</h3>
         <div class="cont-bg">
         <div class="cont-bg">
<p>Bacteria can assist in producing bio-available nitrogen to crops. Nitrogen-fixing bacteria (that inhabit root nodules of legumes such as soybeans) are capable of converting atmospheric nitrogen gas (N2) to a bio-available form at the roots (Hirsch & Mauchline, 2015). Unfortunately, maize does not form root nodules, and therefore cannot produce its own nitrogen. A start-up company in the United States, Pivot Bio, has developed a strain of nitrogen-fixing bacteria for maize so that the crop can produce its own source of nitrogen without root nodules (Pivot Bio, 2021). This bacteria is based on genetic modifications to Klebsiella variicola, which is part of a species complex with Klebsiella pneumoniae. These bacteria have long been known to promote nitrogen fixation in cereal crops (Iniguez et al., 2004). To apply Pivot Bio nitrogen-fixing bacteria , microbes must be applied by tractor during planting of the crop’s seeds (Pivot Bio, 2021). The microbes will then form a symbiotic relationship with the crop’s roots (Pivot Bio, 2021) and the plant will uptake the bio-available nitrogen.</p>
          <p>Ammonia emission is one of the greatest environmental threats from farms (Fangmeier et al. 1994). This is an increasingly destructive threat since ammonia released into the air can affect the crops in the surrounding area as well as the possibility of ammonium contamination into groundwater and river/lake water (Fangmeier et al. 1994). Livestock urine can lead to ammonia losses. It is necessary to mix liquid and solid manures to reduce ammonia emissions (Sommer & Hutchings 2001). Due to ammonia emissions being linked to global warming and climate change, it is necessary to change the diet of livestock and add the required nutrients to soil to reduce these ammonia emissions (Fangmeier et al. 1994). It is important for livestock to be fed a well-balanced diet, including carbohydrate rich foods as it balances out the nitrogen and reduces ammonia emission into the air. Addition of fermentable carbohydrates, such as bran or pulp, into grow-finishing diets, resulted in a 14% reduction of ammonia emission for each percentage increase in carbohydrate (Powers 2004). </p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
  </div>
<div style="margin-top: 30px;">
  <div style="margin-top: 30px;">
       <h1 class="title-bg">The Use of Pivot Bio Nitrogen-Fixing Bacteria on Smallholder Farms</h1>
       <h1 class="title-bg">Picture Based Lesson to Train Farmers</h1>
         <div class="cont-bg">  
         <div class="cont-bg">
<p>The following section aims to investigate the potential benefits and limitations regarding the use of Pivot Bio nitrogen-fixing bacteria on an average smallholder farm in Africa and Asia. The use of Pivot Bio nitrogen-fixing bacteria begins with contacting a sales representative of the company. Despite being a potentially viable solution, this product is currently only available to farmers within the United States (Pivot Bio, 2021). Though machinery is used to apply the bacteria in the United States, the product can be distributed by hand with personal protective equipment (PPE) employed. According to Pivot Bio nitrogen-fixing bacteria’s Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS), this product is “not a physical, health, or environmental hazard”. However, the use of this product will require the use of certain PPE such as safety goggles and disposable rubber or latex gloves (Pivot Bio, 2020). Despite some limitations to the use of this product, its use on smallholder farms has the potential to increase yield. A study conducted on 100 commercial farms across the United States in 2019 showed a 76% positive yield response (Pivot Bio, 2020). This study intended to determine the effect of Pivot Bio’s microbe on the crops’ above-ground nutrient uptake, and nutrient accumulation in the plant (Pivot Bio, 2020). This was accomplished by comparing crops that had synthetic fertilizer applied (at the farm’s usual rate) with crops to which Pivot Bio’s nitrogen-fixing bacteria were added. It is likely that the lack of a baseline nitrogen application at every study site could have misconstrued results. Moreover, the results were based on a single crop season in the United States; the product’s efficacy in other nations/regions with different climates and extreme year-to-year climatic variation is unknown. Since the plants treated with Pivot Bio nitrogen-fixing bacteria were not compared to plants with low nitrogen levels, it is unclear whether Pivot Bio’s product could benefit soils in the tropics and subtropics. Also unknown is the effect of soil pH and low soil organic matter or salinity, which are also significant challenges in the tropics and subtropics. Therefore, further research is required into how this product (and similar products in the future) may aid smallholder farmers. Even if Pivot Bio nitrogen-fixing bacteria assists in increasing crop yields, there are obstacles to the storage and transportation of the product. According to Pivot Bio (2020), their product must be stored in its original container in a cool, well-ventilated, dry area. This warrants the use of a refrigeration unit in the hotter climates of Africa, where these appliances are out of reach of smallholders who lack a reliable source of electricity (Kaygusuz, 2011). Fortunately, it is important to note that the retail cost of this product to an American farmer is estimated to be $8 per hectare applied (Pivot Bio, 2021). Since most smallholder farmers in Africa usually own less than 2 hectares (Njeru, 2013), this expense is insignificant to the benefit it may provide to a maize crop. However, limitations such as its inaccessibility on the market, the lack of access to reliable refrigeration, and unknowns such as its viability in tropical and subtropical  soils, currently reduce its promise to many smallholder farms in Africa.</p>
[[Image:5.10a page-0001.jpg|thumb|centre|Picture Based Lesson to Train Farmer|Click on the image to access a higher resolution image as well as lessons adapted for different geographic regions.]]</p>
</div>
<p><i>For the South Asian version (pictures only, text for you to insert), click this link for lesson 5.12:http://www.sakbooks.com/uploads/8/1/5/7/81574912/5.12_south_asian.pdf</i></p>
</div>
<p><i>For the East/South Asian version (pictures only, text for you to insert), click this link for lesson 5.12:http://www.sakbooks.com/uploads/8/1/5/7/81574912/5.12e.s.a.pdf</i></p>
<div style="margin-top: 30px;">
<p><i>For the Sub-Saharan Africa/Caribbean version (pictures only, text for you to insert), click this link for lesson 5.12:http://www.sakbooks.com/uploads/8/1/5/7/81574912/5.12subsaharan_africa_carribean.pdf</i></p>
      <h1 class="title-bg">Critical Analysis: The Application and Use of Pivot Bio Nitrogen-Fixing Bacteria</h1>
<p><i>For the Latin-America version (pictures only, text for you to insert), click this link for lesson 5.12:http://www.sakbooks.com/uploads/8/1/5/7/81574912/5.12latin_america.pdf</i></p>
        <div class="cont-bg">
<p><i>For North Africa And Middle East version (pictures only, text for you to insert), click this link for lesson Chapter 5. 4.11:http://www.sakbooks.com/uploads/8/1/5/7/81574912/4.11n._africa_middleeast.pdf</i></p>
<p>Pivot Bio nitrogen-fixing bacteria replaces synthetic nitrogen fertilizers which are usually applied early in the growing season. In areas with high amounts of precipitation, high heat, water logging and/or low nutrient sandy soils, the likelihood of nitrogen leaching through the soil profile or volatizing into the atmosphere increases (Cabrera et al., 2005). This is especially problematic because the peak demand for nitrogen in maize is during grain formation (Aslam et al., 2012). The nitrogen-fixing bacteria within this product, however, claims to function late in the growing season to match peak demand. Unfortunately, little information is available on the functioning of these bacteria in high-heat conditions. Studies suggest that nitrogen-fixing bacteria populations decline when exposed to high temperatures (McGill et al., 1981), indicating a potential limitation during the storage, transportation, and use of this product on crops in smallholder farms in the tropics and subtropics. Moreover, low literacy rates and inaccessible scientific jargon may pose a hinderance to a smallholder farmer’s understanding of the application and use of the product, requiring the use of more appropriate training materials in form of videos, picture-based manuals, etc. (Devkota et al., 2020). Lastly, although this product succeeds on commercial farms in the United States, the competitive biofertilizer industry in India may prove to be more accessible to smallholder farmers in Africa. According to Patra et al. (2021), Indian scientists have already begun to introduce certain nitrogen-fixing bacteria in the form of biofertilizers. A more recent development includes the coating of seeds with biofertilizer, reducing the need for initial application. If the use of Indian biofertilizers prove successful to smallholder farmers, then it may be more feasible to utilize a product tested in a similar climate. Other companies that specifically develop nitrogen-fixing bacteria for maize (such as Azotic, Bioconsortia, etc.) may also prove to be beneficial to smallholder farmers, yet their products may suffer from the same constraints as PivotBio and would require further investigation.</p>
<p><i>Source: MN Raizada and L Smith (2016) A Picture Book of Best Practices for Subsistence Farmers. eBook, University of Guelph Sustainable Agriculture Kit (SAK) Project, June 2016, Guelph, Canada.</i></p>
</div>
    </div>
</div>
  </div>  
<div style="margin-top: 30px;">
  <div style="margin-top: 30px;">
       <h1 class="title-bg">Alternatives to Maize Nitrogen-Fixing Bacteria</h1>
       <h3 class="title-bg">Helpful Links</h3>
         <div class="cont-bg">  
         <div class="cont-bg">
<p>There are numerous methods that can increase soil nitrogen, including crop rotation (intercropping) and the use of manure, compost, or leaf litter. Crop rotation or intercropping with legumes is a viable alternative to providing nitrogen to the crop’s soil without applying fertilizer, manure, or maize nitrogen-fixing bacteria (De Notaris et al., 2018). Since legumes naturally host nitrogen-fixing bacteria within root nodules, plant-available nitrogen will be deposited into the soil after decomposition of stems and roots. Utilizing manure, compost, or leaf litter (i.e., practicing no-till on the field) can also provide nitrogen to the soil. However, these alternatives could potentially result in increased runoff, volatilization of nitrogen gas, and leaching – contributing to contaminated waterways and degraded soil (Eghball & Power, 1999). However, when applied properly, these agricultural amendments should not harm the surrounding environment and should prove to be low-cost alternatives to solve a lack of soil nitrogen for smallholder farmers in Africa, allowing them to be self-reliant</p>
          <p>To learn more about the benefits and challenges of using human urine to improve agriculture, follow this link:</p>
<p>Useful Resources</p>
          <p>http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2013/04/10/human-pee-added-to-compost-boosts-crops/]</p>
[[File:Capture 303.JPG]]
          <p>http://permaculturenews.org/2011/11/27/urine-closing-the-npk-loop/</p>
          <p>http://modernfarmer.com/2014/01/human-pee-proven-fertilizer-future/</p>
          <p>http://www.gardeningknowhow.com/garden-how-to/soil-fertilizers/feeding-plants-with-urine.htm</p>
          <p>Refer to SAK Picture Book Lesson 5.10a and 5.10b p. 54-55 for step by step picture instructions</p>
     </div>
     </div>
   </div>
   </div>
  <div style="margin-top: 30px;">
<div style="margin-top: 30px;">
       <h1 class="title-bg">References</h1>
       <h3 class="title-bg">References</h3>
         <div class="cont-bg">
         <div class="cont-bg">
           <p>1. Aslam, M., Zamir, M. S. I., Afzal, I., Yaseen, M., Mubeen, M., & Shoaib, A. (2012). Drought stress, its effect on maize production and development of drought tolerance through potassium application. Agronomic Research in Moldavia, 46(2): 99-144.</p>  
           <p>1.Agriculture and Forestry. (2006). Applying Manure on Perennial Forage. Agriculture and Forestry. http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex10727</p>
<p>2. Bhattacharjee, R. B., Singh, A., & Mukhopadhyay, S. N. (2008). Use of nitrogen-fixing bacteria as biofertiliser for non-legumes: prospects and challenges. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 80(2), 199-209.</p>
          <p>2.Akpan-Idiok, A.U., Udo, I.A., & Braide, E.I. (2012). The use of human urine as an organic fertilizer in the production of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) in South Eastern Nigeria. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 62, 14-20. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2012.02.003.</p>
<p>3. Cabrera, V. E., Breuer, N. E., Hildebrand, P. E., & Letson, D. (2005). The dynamic North Florida dairy farm model: A user-friendly computerized tool for increasing profits while minimizing N leaching under varying climatic conditions. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture, 49(2), 286-308.</p>
          <p>3.Andersson, E., (2015). Turning waste into value: using human urine to enrich soils for sustainable food production in Uganda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 96, 290-298. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.070.</p>
<p>4. De Notaris, C., Rasmussen, J., Sørensen, P., & Olesen, J. E. (2018). Nitrogen leaching: A crop rotation perspective on the effect of N surplus, field management and use of catch crops. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 255, 1-11.</p>
          <p>4.Arnold, C., (2013). Human Pee Added to Compost Boosts Crops. National Geographic. http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2013/04/10/human-pee-added-to-compost-boosts-crops/</p>
<p>5. Devkota, R., Hambly Odame, H., Fitzsimons, J., Pudasaini, R., & Raizada, M. N. (2020). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Picture-Based Agricultural Extension Lessons Developed Using Participatory Testing and Editing with Smallholder Women Farmers in Nepal. Sustainability, 12(22), 9699.</p>
          <p>5.Bedford, M. R., Choct, M., & O'Neill, H. M. (2016). Nutrition Experiments in Pigs and Poultry: A Practical Guide. CABI.</p>
<p>6. Eghball, B., & Power, J. F. (1999). Composted and noncomposted manure application to conventional and no‐tillage systems: Maize yield and nitrogen uptake. Agronomy Journal, 91(5), 819-825.</p>
          <p>6.Bishwakarma, B.K., Dahal, N.R., Allen, R., Rajbhandari, N.P., Dhital, B.K., Gurung, D.B., Bajracharya, R.M., & Baillie, I.C. (2015). Effects of improved management and quality of farmyard manure on soil organic carbon contents in small-holder farming systems of the Middle Hills of Nepal. Climate and Development, 7(5), 426-436. doi: 10.1080/17565529.2014.966045</p>
<p>7. Erenstein, O., Sayre, K., Wall, P., Hellin, J., & Dixon, J. (2012). Conservation agriculture in maize-and wheat-based systems in the (sub) tropics: lessons from adaptation initiatives in South Asia, Mexico, and Southern Africa. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 36(2), 180-206.</p>
          <p>7.Caldwell, I. & Rosemarin, A. (2014). Human urine and faeces as a fertilizer. Stockholm Environment Institute. </p>
<p>8. FAO (2017). World fertilizer trends and outlook to 2020. FAO. Retrieved December 1, 2021 from https://www.fao.org/3/i6895e/i6895e.pdf. </p>
          <p>8.Devendra, C. (1992). Nutritional potential of fodder trees and shrubs as protein sources in ruminant nutrition. Legume trees and other fodder trees as protein sources for livestock, 100, 95-113.</p>
<p>9. Harter, R. D. (2007). Acid soils of the tropics. ECHO Technical Note, ECHO, 11. Retrieved December 1, 2021 from http://courses.umass.edu/psoil370/Syllabus-files/Acid_Soils_of_the_Tropics.pdf.</p>  
          <p>9.De Vries, J.W., Aarnink, A.J.A., Groot Koerkamp, P.W.G., & De Boer, I.J.M. (2013). Life Cycle Assessment of Segregating Fattening Pig Urine and Feces Compared to Conventional Liquid Manure Management. Environmental Science & Technology, 47, 1587-1597. doi: 10.1021/es302951a</p>
<p>10. Hirsch, P. R., & Mauchline, T. H. (2015). The importance of the microbial N cycle in soil for crop plant nutrition. Advances in Applied Microbiology, 93, 45-71.</p>
        <p>10.Fangmeier, A., Hadwiger-Fangmeier, A., Van der Eerden, L., & Jäger, H-J. (1994). Effects of atmospheric ammonia on vegetation – A review. Environmental Pollution, 86(1), 43-82.</p>
<p>11. Jones, C., & Jacobsen, J. (2005). Plant Nutrient and Soil Fertility. Nutrient Management Module, 2(11), 1-11.</p>
<p>11.Feineigle, M. (2011). Urine: Closing the NPK Loop. Permaculture Research Institute.  
<p>12. Kaygusuz, K. (2011). Energy services and energy poverty for sustainable rural development. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(2), 936-947.</p>
http://permaculturenews.org/2011/11/27/urine-closing-the-npk-loop/</p>
<p>13. Koutika, L. S., Epron, D., Bouillet, J. P., & Mareschal, L. (2014). Changes in N and C concentrations, soil acidity and P availability in tropical mixed acacia and eucalypt plantations on a nutrient-poor sandy soil. Plant and Soil, 379(1), 205-216.</p>
<p>12.Jana, B.B., Bag, S.K., & Rana, S. (2012). Comparative evaluation of the fertilizer value of human urine, cow manure and their mix for the production of carp fingerlings in small holding tanks. Aquaculture International, 20, 735-749. doi: 10.1007/s10499-012-9500-1.</p>
<p>14. Maathuis, F. J. (2009). Physiological functions of mineral macronutrients. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 12(3), 250-258.</p>
<p>13.Powell, J. M., & Williams, T. O. (1993). Livestock, nutrient cycling and sustainable agriculture in the West African Sahel. Sustainable Agriculture Programme, International Institute for Environment and Development, 37.</p>
<p>15. Mata, L. J. (1975). Malnutrition-infection interactions in the tropics. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 24(4), 564-574.</p>
<p>14.Powers, W. (2004). Practices to reduce ammonia emissions from livestock operations.
<p>16. McGill, W. B., Hunt, H. W., Woodmansee, R. G., & Reuss, J. O. (1981). Phoenix, a model of the dynamics of carbon and nitrogen in grassland soils. Ecological Bulletins, 49-115.</p>
Rees, R.M., Baddeley, J.A., Bhogal, A., Ball, B.C., Chadwick, D.R., MacLeod, M., Lilly, A., Pappa, V.A., Thorman, R.E., Watson, C.A., & Williams, J.R. (2013). Nitrous oxide mitigation in UK agriculture. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 59, 3-15. doi: 10.1080/00380768.2012.733869.</p>
<p>17. Njeru, E. M. (2013). Crop diversification: a potential strategy to mitigate food insecurity by smallholders in sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 3(4), 63-69.</p>
<p>15.Sommer, S.G., & Hutchings, N.J., (2001). Ammonia emission from field applied manure and its reduction – invited paper. European Journal of Agronomy, 15, 1-15. doi:10.1016/S1161-0301(01)00112-5.</p>
<p>18. Olson, R. A., & Sander, D. H. (1988). Corn production. In Corn and Corn Improvement Vol. 18, 3rd edition (editors G.F. Sprague and J.W. Dudley), Chapter 11 639-686, ASA, CSSA, SSSA.</p>
<p>16.The Sustainable Soil Management Programme. (2007). Improved cattleshed for urine collection. ICIMOD. http://www.icimod.org/?q=10339</p>
<p>19. Patra, A., Mohanty, S., & Thakur, J. (2021). Bio-fertilizer applications in India: Current status and future prospects. Indian Institute of Soil Science. Retrieved December 1, 2021 from https://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/GSP/GSOBI-21/DAY3/PS5/14-15/1_Ashok_Patra_ID144__.pdf.</p> 
<p>17.Tremorin, D.G., Tenuta, M., Mkhabela, M., Flaten, D.N., & Ominski, K.H. (2012). Nitrous oxide emissions from feces and synthetic urine of cattle grazing forage grass fertilized with hog slurry. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 177(3-4), 225-236. doi: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2012.08.008.</p>
<p>20. Pérez-Montaño, F., Alias-Villegas, C., Bellogin, R., del Cerro, P., Espuny, M., Jimene-Guerrero, I., Lopez-Baena, F., Ollero, F. & Cubo, T. (2014). Plant growth promotion in cereal and leguminous agricultural important plants: From microorganism capacities to crop production. Microbiological Research, 169(5-6), 325-336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2013.09.011. </p>
<p>21. Pivot Bio. (2020). 2019 Performance Report. Pivot Bio. Retrieved September 29, 2021 from https://info.pivotbio.com/hubfs/Performance%20Reports/2019-Pivot-Bio-Performance-Report.pdf.</p>
<p>22. Pivot Bio. (2020). Pivot Bio PROVEN Safety Data Sheet. Pivot Bio. Retrieved September 29, 2021 from https://info.pivotbio.com/hubfs/Safety%20Data%20Sheets/Pivot-Bio-2020-08-07-PBP-Safety-Data-Sheet.pdf?hsLang=en-us.</p>
<p>23. Pivot Bio. (2021). Turn to a better nitrogen. Pivot Bio. Retrieved September 29, 2021 from https://www.pivotbio.com/product.</p>
<p>24. Sharpley, A., Meisinger, J. J., Breeuwsma, A., Sims, J. T., Daniel, T. C., & Schepers, J. S. (1998). Impacts of animal manure management on ground and surface water quality. Animal Waste Utilization: Effective Use of Manure as a Soil Resource, 173-242. Ann Arbor Press. Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.</p>
<p>25. Snyder, C. S., Bruulsema, T. W., Jensen, T. L., & Fixen, P. E. (2009). Review of greenhouse gas emissions from crop production systems and fertilizer management effects. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 133(3-4), 247-266.</p>
<p>26. Walling, E., & Vaneeckhaute, C. (2020). Greenhouse gas emissions from inorganic and organic fertilizer production and use: a review of emission factors and their variability. Journal of Environmental Management, 276, 111211.
</p>
     </div>
     </div>
   </div>
   </div>

Latest revision as of 14:38, 30 August 2024

4.10 - Livestock sheds and collecting urine to add to manure


Jaime Selinger, University of Guelph, Canada

4.10.jpeg

Source:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Compost_site_germany.JPG

Suggested citation for this chapter.

Selinger,J. (2022) Livestock sheds and collecting urine to add to manure. In Farmpedia, The Encyclopedia for Small Scale Farmers. Editor, M.N. Raizada, University of Guelph, Canada. http://www.farmpedia.org

Introduction

The soils of smallholder farmers often lack the proper amount of nitrogen, phosphate and potassium which are essential for healthy and bountiful growth of crops. Urine collected from livestock and humans is very rich in nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium which is important for plant growth. A family of four can produce the equivalent of a 50 kg bag of NPK fertilizer from urine alone every year (Feineigle 2011). This urine has a 10:1:4 ratio of NPK which is a higher nitrogen content than many mineral fertilizers (Feineigle 2011). Humans produce roughly 500 litres of urine and 50 litres of faeces per person per year (Caldwell & Rosemarin 2014). These contain about 4 kg of nitrogen, 0.5 kg of phosphorous and 1 kg of potassium, the three basic elements for plant growth. The exact amount varies from region to region depending on food intake. Seventy per cent of the nutrients excreted by humans are in the urine fraction (Caldwell & Rosemarin 2014). Livestock consumption of leguminous fodder such as Acacia, Calliandra and Erythrina can increase the nitrogen content of their urine (Devendra 1992).

Since the most prominent nutrient found in urine is nitrogen, it is important to have balanced nitrogen levels in urine that is mixed with manure and to balance urine addition with other nutrients required for plant growth. The importance of nitrogen to plant growth is outlined in Chapter 1.4 – Balanced Fertilization. Using urine as a way to enrich manure is a more cost-effective substitute for fertilizer.

In areas where there is not as much livestock, human urine can also be added to crops as noted above. Akpan et al. (2012) recently demonstrated that human urine is strongly alkaline and contains a moderate amount of nutrients (N, P, K, Mg, Ca and Na). Application of either urine or inorganic fertilizer significantly (P<0.05) increased plant nutrient uptake compared with the control (Akpan-Idiok et al. 2012). Human or livestock urine can also be used directly in home gardens.

How the practice is conducted

Urine can be collected from livestock using a concrete floor that is sloped toward a PVC pipe that empties into a manure pit. This pipe leads to a pit or inside a mud/stone wall where it is stored. The mixture is then transferred from the storage area and spread along the soil where the crops are to grow. An alternative to this process is that the urine pipe leads to a storage drum from which urine can be added to the manure. These practices require time and effort from the household. Building a concrete floor with a slope towards a PVC pipe would cost a total of $12 USD in materials and would require up to 3 days of construction labour (Sustainable Soil Management Programme 2007). A smallholder farmer can undertake this labour, but it requires specialized knowledge and training (e.g. how to mix concrete). The construction of this can be done by digging a manure pi within the livestock shed in which the urine will be emptied into (SSMP 2007). Then, the smallholder farmer will have to make a floor at the bottom of the shed where the urine will be collected out of a compact of soil or clay, or cement if they are able to afford it (SSMP 2007). Other costs for this would be a collection devise for the urine after it is disposed into the manure pit (SSMP 2007).

There is an easier alternative to collecting urine from livestock, specifically by penning the livestock in a certain area where crops will grow prior to planting so that their urine and feces will directly mix with the soil (Bedford et al. 2016). The animals are able to graze the land and release urine and feces and are able to comfortably move around the land rather than be restricted (Bedford et al. 2016). This process requires little labour on the part of the farming household.

The urine of the livestock is collected within the livestock shed. It is suggested that the livestock shed be created out of fabric as it provides more ventilation and filtration for sheds in hot climates and is more cost-effective for smallholder farmers and industrial farmers alike (Megadome Buildings 2016). As resources are sometimes limited for smallholder farmers, the fabric livestock shed will work as long as they have constructed a proper concrete floor and slope towards the manure pit.

This is not a new concept and has been utilized by many smallholder farmers. In a study conducted by Powell & Williams (1996) in the West African Sahel, the yield was compared over the course of six years using urine from livestock as fertilizer compared to chemical fertilizer. The authors found that there was a 52% increase in yields within the first year of the study (Powell & Williams 1996).

Ammonia Emissions

Ammonia emission is one of the greatest environmental threats from farms (Fangmeier et al. 1994). This is an increasingly destructive threat since ammonia released into the air can affect the crops in the surrounding area as well as the possibility of ammonium contamination into groundwater and river/lake water (Fangmeier et al. 1994). Livestock urine can lead to ammonia losses. It is necessary to mix liquid and solid manures to reduce ammonia emissions (Sommer & Hutchings 2001). Due to ammonia emissions being linked to global warming and climate change, it is necessary to change the diet of livestock and add the required nutrients to soil to reduce these ammonia emissions (Fangmeier et al. 1994). It is important for livestock to be fed a well-balanced diet, including carbohydrate rich foods as it balances out the nitrogen and reduces ammonia emission into the air. Addition of fermentable carbohydrates, such as bran or pulp, into grow-finishing diets, resulted in a 14% reduction of ammonia emission for each percentage increase in carbohydrate (Powers 2004).

Picture Based Lesson to Train Farmers

Click on the image to access a higher resolution image as well as lessons adapted for different geographic regions.

For the South Asian version (pictures only, text for you to insert), click this link for lesson 5.12:http://www.sakbooks.com/uploads/8/1/5/7/81574912/5.12_south_asian.pdf

For the East/South Asian version (pictures only, text for you to insert), click this link for lesson 5.12:http://www.sakbooks.com/uploads/8/1/5/7/81574912/5.12e.s.a.pdf

For the Sub-Saharan Africa/Caribbean version (pictures only, text for you to insert), click this link for lesson 5.12:http://www.sakbooks.com/uploads/8/1/5/7/81574912/5.12subsaharan_africa_carribean.pdf

For the Latin-America version (pictures only, text for you to insert), click this link for lesson 5.12:http://www.sakbooks.com/uploads/8/1/5/7/81574912/5.12latin_america.pdf

For North Africa And Middle East version (pictures only, text for you to insert), click this link for lesson Chapter 5. 4.11:http://www.sakbooks.com/uploads/8/1/5/7/81574912/4.11n._africa_middleeast.pdf

Source: MN Raizada and L Smith (2016) A Picture Book of Best Practices for Subsistence Farmers. eBook, University of Guelph Sustainable Agriculture Kit (SAK) Project, June 2016, Guelph, Canada.

Helpful Links

To learn more about the benefits and challenges of using human urine to improve agriculture, follow this link:

http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2013/04/10/human-pee-added-to-compost-boosts-crops/]

http://permaculturenews.org/2011/11/27/urine-closing-the-npk-loop/

http://modernfarmer.com/2014/01/human-pee-proven-fertilizer-future/

http://www.gardeningknowhow.com/garden-how-to/soil-fertilizers/feeding-plants-with-urine.htm

Refer to SAK Picture Book Lesson 5.10a and 5.10b p. 54-55 for step by step picture instructions

References

1.Agriculture and Forestry. (2006). Applying Manure on Perennial Forage. Agriculture and Forestry. http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex10727

2.Akpan-Idiok, A.U., Udo, I.A., & Braide, E.I. (2012). The use of human urine as an organic fertilizer in the production of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus) in South Eastern Nigeria. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 62, 14-20. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2012.02.003.

3.Andersson, E., (2015). Turning waste into value: using human urine to enrich soils for sustainable food production in Uganda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 96, 290-298. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.070.

4.Arnold, C., (2013). Human Pee Added to Compost Boosts Crops. National Geographic. http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2013/04/10/human-pee-added-to-compost-boosts-crops/

5.Bedford, M. R., Choct, M., & O'Neill, H. M. (2016). Nutrition Experiments in Pigs and Poultry: A Practical Guide. CABI.

6.Bishwakarma, B.K., Dahal, N.R., Allen, R., Rajbhandari, N.P., Dhital, B.K., Gurung, D.B., Bajracharya, R.M., & Baillie, I.C. (2015). Effects of improved management and quality of farmyard manure on soil organic carbon contents in small-holder farming systems of the Middle Hills of Nepal. Climate and Development, 7(5), 426-436. doi: 10.1080/17565529.2014.966045

7.Caldwell, I. & Rosemarin, A. (2014). Human urine and faeces as a fertilizer. Stockholm Environment Institute.

8.Devendra, C. (1992). Nutritional potential of fodder trees and shrubs as protein sources in ruminant nutrition. Legume trees and other fodder trees as protein sources for livestock, 100, 95-113.

9.De Vries, J.W., Aarnink, A.J.A., Groot Koerkamp, P.W.G., & De Boer, I.J.M. (2013). Life Cycle Assessment of Segregating Fattening Pig Urine and Feces Compared to Conventional Liquid Manure Management. Environmental Science & Technology, 47, 1587-1597. doi: 10.1021/es302951a

10.Fangmeier, A., Hadwiger-Fangmeier, A., Van der Eerden, L., & Jäger, H-J. (1994). Effects of atmospheric ammonia on vegetation – A review. Environmental Pollution, 86(1), 43-82.

11.Feineigle, M. (2011). Urine: Closing the NPK Loop. Permaculture Research Institute. http://permaculturenews.org/2011/11/27/urine-closing-the-npk-loop/

12.Jana, B.B., Bag, S.K., & Rana, S. (2012). Comparative evaluation of the fertilizer value of human urine, cow manure and their mix for the production of carp fingerlings in small holding tanks. Aquaculture International, 20, 735-749. doi: 10.1007/s10499-012-9500-1.

13.Powell, J. M., & Williams, T. O. (1993). Livestock, nutrient cycling and sustainable agriculture in the West African Sahel. Sustainable Agriculture Programme, International Institute for Environment and Development, 37.

14.Powers, W. (2004). Practices to reduce ammonia emissions from livestock operations. Rees, R.M., Baddeley, J.A., Bhogal, A., Ball, B.C., Chadwick, D.R., MacLeod, M., Lilly, A., Pappa, V.A., Thorman, R.E., Watson, C.A., & Williams, J.R. (2013). Nitrous oxide mitigation in UK agriculture. Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, 59, 3-15. doi: 10.1080/00380768.2012.733869.

15.Sommer, S.G., & Hutchings, N.J., (2001). Ammonia emission from field applied manure and its reduction – invited paper. European Journal of Agronomy, 15, 1-15. doi:10.1016/S1161-0301(01)00112-5.

16.The Sustainable Soil Management Programme. (2007). Improved cattleshed for urine collection. ICIMOD. http://www.icimod.org/?q=10339

17.Tremorin, D.G., Tenuta, M., Mkhabela, M., Flaten, D.N., & Ominski, K.H. (2012). Nitrous oxide emissions from feces and synthetic urine of cattle grazing forage grass fertilized with hog slurry. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 177(3-4), 225-236. doi: 10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2012.08.008.

Retrieved from "https://farmpedia.org/index.php?title=Chapter_4.10&oldid=84461"