Abstract
Maize double-cropping production systems in Mediterranean areas have a great nitrogen extraction capacity and high nitrogen (N) requirements. This study aims to assess whether in these farming systems, animal manure can be applied, using adequate management practices, at levels exceeding the maximum annual amount of livestock manure established in the European Nitrate Directive for vulnerable zones (170 kg N ha−1) without increasing the risk of water nitrate contamination. We compare the risk of nitrate leaching under two fertilisation strategies, one with synthetic fertilisers and the second with a maximised application of pig slurry, exceeding the limits of the EU Nitrate Directive, in two soil types. Crop yields, N extraction and nitrate concentrations below the crop root zone were not affected by the fertilisation strategies at each site. The results show that pig slurry can be applied above the limit of 170 kg N ha−1 under the conditions of the study, up to 360 kg N ha−1, without increasing the risk for nitrate leaching.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 4
Claim · model-written summary
Crop yields did not differ by fertilisation strategy at either site.
- Treatment
- maximised application of pig slurrye1
- Outcome
- Crop yieldse0
- Direction
- not affectede0
- Qualifier
- at each sitee0
- Comparator
- synthetic fertiliserse1
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Crop yields, N extraction and nitrate concentrations below the crop root zone were not affected by the fertilisation strategies at each site”
e1“one with synthetic fertilisers and the second with a maximised application of pig slurry”
t0“Maize double-cropping production systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop nitrogen extraction did not differ by fertilisation strategy at either site.
- Treatment
- maximised application of pig slurrye1
- Outcome
- N extractione0
- Direction
- not affectede0
- Qualifier
- at each sitee0
- Comparator
- synthetic fertiliserse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Crop yields, N extraction and nitrate concentrations below the crop root zone were not affected by the fertilisation strategies at each site”
e1“one with synthetic fertilisers and the second with a maximised application of pig slurry”
t0“Maize double-cropping production systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrate concentration below the crop root zone did not differ by fertilisation strategy.
- Treatment
- maximised application of pig slurrye1
- Outcome
- nitrate concentrations below the crop root zonee0
- Direction
- not affectede0
- Qualifier
- at each sitee0
- Comparator
- synthetic fertiliserse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Crop yields, N extraction and nitrate concentrations below the crop root zone were not affected by the fertilisation strategies at each site”
e1“one with synthetic fertilisers and the second with a maximised application of pig slurry”
t0“Maize double-cropping production systems”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude pig slurry can reach 360 kg N ha−1 without increasing nitrate leaching risk under study conditions.
- Outcome
- pig slurry can be applied above the limit of 170 kg N ha−1e0
- Value
- 360 kg N ha−1e0
- Qualifier
- under the conditions of the studye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“pig slurry can be applied above the limit of 170 kg N ha−1 under the conditions of the study, up to 360 kg N ha−1, without increasing the risk for nitrate leaching”
t0“Maize double-cropping production systems”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
137 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,026 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- positive
1,160 papers more in this group
See all 1,164 papers →fertilization · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
422 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3,485 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- positive
3,904 papers more in this group
See all 3,908 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.