Can Sugar Beet Juice Effluent Be Used as a Biofertilizer?

Transcription

1 Can Sugar Beet Juice Effluent Be Used as a Biofertilizer? WRPI/USDA WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PROJECT REPORT Anna Allen USDA-ARS-SJVASC 9611 E. RIVERBEND AVE. PARLIER, CA 93648

2 1 Table of Contents Acknowledgements... 2 Executive Summary... 2 Project Objectives... 2 Project Approach... 3 Project Outcomes... 4 Conclusions... 5 Tables and Figures... 6

3 2 Acknowledgements This project was supported by Hispanic-Serving Institution s Education Program Grant no from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture. I would like to thank Dr. Gary Bañuelos for his guidance and support, and for his encouragement to pursue this project. I would also like to thank the USDA-ARS facility in Parlier, CA, for allowing me the use of the premises for the project. Lastly, I would like to thank CSU Fresno and CSU San Bernardino for providing the opportunity for this WRPI/USDA Watershed Management internship. Executive Summary Commented [AA1]: (Brief overview of entire project) When using sugar beets to produce ethanol, a waste byproduct is produced; this byproduct is beet juice effluent (BJ). In this project, we attempted to determine whether or not this effluent would be a feasible material for use as a soil biofertilizer to different crops. The three plant species tested in this experiment were tomato, alfalfa, and tall wheat grass. Results obtained with this project would provide information on the recycling and utilization of beet juice effluent as a biofertilizer, rather than simply disposing of it as an undesired waste material. If successful, this sugar beet byproduct from bioethanol production can be an added environmentally-friendly bonus to the new green technology associated with ethanol production. Our results showed that we can safely use beet juice effluent as a bioamendment for eight weeks with no significant effects on the plants. Project Objectives The primary objective of this project was to determine the feasibility of applying sugar beet juice effluent (Figure 1) as a soil biofertilizer to crops. Sugar beet effluent is a by-product of the bio-ethanol process technology that uses sugar beet as a plant source for making ethanol. This Commented [AA2]: (This section should be an introduction to the project, discuss your potential career pathway as it pertains to the USDA, and convey what your original goals were on this project. If your goals changed over the course of the internship, mention the revised goals and the reason for the change. You also should discuss the specific project tasks you originally set out. If your tasks varied from the original ones, discuss the changes and the need for the changes.)

4 3 project aims at identifying recycling options for using residual sugar beet effluent as a biofertilizer for agricultural production in Central California where sugar beet bioethanol is being produced. The specific aim was to evaluate sugar beet effluent as a biofertilizer for growing tomato, alfalfa, and tall wheatgrass. These plants were grown and irrigated with different amounts of sugar beet effluent added as a fertilizer treatment (fertigation) to two different types of soil under controlled environmental conditions. After eight weeks, plant growth and nutritional quality were evaluated after the shoots were harvested, oven-dried, and acid digested. Samples were analyzed for macro and micro-nutrients using inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICPMS), according to Agilent manufacture protocol. Project Approach In this project, seeds from the following three plant species were germinated in promix soil: tomato, alfalfa, and tall wheat grass. After 5 days, these plants were then transferred into two Commented [AA3]: (Discuss what methods or steps you took to achieve your goals and your tasks from the above section. If your approach changed over the course of the internship, discuss the changes and the reasons for the changes.) soils; a low saline (LS) clay loam soil (EC of 2-4 ds/m) collected from Red Rock Ranch in Five Points, CA, and a non-saline (NS) sandy loam soil (EC of <1 ds/m) collected from Parlier, CA (Figure 2); these two soil types were chosen to help determine whether the effluent would have a different effect on a crop depending on the soil type in which it was grown, i.e. LS clay loam soil versus NS sandy loam soil. Once the plants were transplanted, they were grown under greenhouse conditions in a completely randomized block. In the two soil types, we used the following three fertigation treatments (BJ mixed with DI water and applied as irrigation water): A) control (irrigated with DI water and Miracle Grow fertilizer in a NS sandy loam soil); B) soil application of 1% BJ effluent; and C) soil application of 1% effluent and ½ strength Miracle Gro. These respective treatments were applied in the afternoon for eight weeks, once weekly on all plants (except for the controls, which received Miracle Gro at the same rate as

5 4 beet juice treatments once every two weeks). On days where the treatments were not applied, the plants were irrigated daily with 5 ml DI water per pot in the afternoon. After the treatment period was concluded, plants were all harvested from their pots, and soil samples were collected. Fresh plant weights were taken immediately after harvest, and dry weights were recorded after the plant and soil samples were oven-dried for 3 days at 6ºC. Plant samples for the tomato, alfalfa, and tall wheat grass were then ground and extracted for chloride, and then acid digested and analyzed for all nutrients by ICP analysis. Soil samples were ground and then tested for ph, electrical conductivity (EC), chloride, and analyzed for all nutrients by ICP analysis. The main obstacle encountered during this trial was that the alfalfa inexplicably did not grow well in the clay loam soil. Hence, alfalfa was only grown and treated in the sandy loam soil. Project Outcomes The biomass of the tomato plants was reduced when treated with BJ effluent, especially with Treatment C (1% BJ effluent and ½ strength Miracle Gro ) in the NS sandy loam soil. In tall Commented [AA4]: (This section should discuss your results and an analysis of your results, if applicable. If your results were unexpected or negative, try to explain the reasons and what could have been done differently. If any lessons were learned during the course of the internship, mention them in this section.) wheatgrass grown in NS sandy loam soil, Treatment B (1% BJ effluent applied to the soil) slightly increased the biomass of the plants. However, the opposite effect was observed in alfalfa (grown in NS sandy loam soil) with Treatment B; they experienced a decrease in biomass. Between the two soil types, it was clear that the LS clay loam soil from the west side had higher concentrations of chlorine, boron, calcium, selenium, manganese, potassium, and, especially, sodium than the NS sandy loam soil from Parlier. In contrast, the NS sandy loam soil consistently had higher levels of phosphorus.

6 5 Among the plants, the tall wheatgrass, tomato, and alfalfa grown in LS clay loam had exceptionally high concentrations of tissue boron, chlorine, sodium, and selenium, calcium, manganese, magnesium, and sulfur. The soil type seemed to vastly influence the levels of the above listed elements for all tested crops, while the BJ effluent treatments seemed to have no significant impact on the elemental content in plants. Conclusions In this project, beet juice effluent was tested as a biofertilizer on three different plant species in two different soils under greenhouse conditions: tomato, alfalfa, and tall wheat grass. After 8 weeks of applying the biofertilizer treatments to the soil via fertigation, it was apparent that plant growth was affected by the BJ treatments, albeit in different ways. At this point, it is clear from the data that plants of different types have different reactions to treatment BJ effluent. More studies would be necessary to determine which plants could plausibly be treated with the BJ effluent to experience a positive effect. However, it is clear that there were no obvious adverse effects on the plants over during the eight weeks with the tested BJ treatments. Thus, it appears in this study that the soil type has significantly more influence on the nutrient levels in the plants than the BJ effluent. Future studies should focus on increased duration of application of the BJ effluent, since we only know BJ effluent is not harmful to alfalfa, tomato, and tall wheatgrass for eight weeks. However, more extensive testing is required to know if this is the case for longer periods of BJ effluent disposal on plant species. Studies should also focus on selecting other crops to test, and at different concentrations of BJ effluent.

7 6 Tables and Figures Figure 1. Beet Juice Effluent Figure 2. Sandy loam soil from Parlier (left) and clay loam soil from Red Rock Ranch (right)

8 7 Figure 3. Analysis of beet juice effluent. ph EC (ms/cm) Cl (mg/l) N (mg/l) Beet Juice Figure 4. Tall Wheat Grass treated with Beet Juice Effluent in NS sandy loam soil

9 8 Figure 5. Tall Wheat Grass treated with DI water in NS sandy loam soil Figure 6. Tall Wheat Grass treated with DI water in LS clay loam soil

10 9 Figure 7. Tall Wheat Grass treated with Beet Juice Effluent in LS clay loam soil Figure 8. Alfalfa treated with Beet Juice Effluent in NS sandy loam soil

11 1 Figure 9. Alfalfa treated with DI water in NS sandy loam soil Figure 1. Tomato treated with DI water in NS sandy loam soil

12 11 Figure 11. Tomato treated with DI water in LS clay loam soil Figure 12. Tomato treated with Beet Juice Effluent in NS sandy loam soil Commented [AA5]: Can BJ be successfully be used on all tested plant species? Was there a difference depending on soil type? Why did you use two different soil types?

13 CA CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) B CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) 12 Figure 13. Boron concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy Figure 14. Calcium concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy

14 CU CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) CL CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) 13 Figure 15. Chlorine concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy Figure 16. Copper concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy

15 K CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) FE CONCNTRATIONS (MG/KG) 14 Figure 17. Iron concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy Figure 18. Potassium concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy

16 MN CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) MG CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) 15 Figure 19. Magnesium concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy Figure 2. Manganese concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy

17 NA CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) MO CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) 16 Figure 21. Molybdenum concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy Figure 22. Sodium concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy

18 S CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) P CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) 17 Figure 23. Phosphorus concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy Figure 24. Sulfur concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy

19 ZN CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) SE CONCENTRATIONS (MG/KG) 18 Figure 25. Selenium concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy Figure 26. Zinc concentrations (mg/kg) in plants treated with BJ treatments Tomato (LS clay clay sandy

20 19 Table 1. Fresh and dry weights of tomato, alfalfa, and tall wheatgrass irrigated with BJ treatments. Plant Soil: Treated with: Rep: Plant Fresh Weight (g) Plant Dried Weight (g) Tomato LS Clay Loam Beet Effluent Tomato LS Clay Loam Beet Effluent Tomato LS Clay Loam Beet Effluent Tomato LS Clay Loam DI Water Tomato NS Sandy Loam DI Water Tomato NS Sandy Loam DI Water Tomato NS Sandy Loam DI Water Tomato NS Sandy Loam Beet Effluent Tomato NS Sandy Loam Beet Effluent Tomato NS Sandy Loam Beet Effluent Tomato LS Clay Loam DI Water Tomato LS Clay Loam DI Water Alfalfa NS Sandy Loam DI Water Alfalfa NS Sandy Loam DI Water Alfalfa NS Sandy Loam DI Water Alfalfa NS Sandy Loam Beet Effluent Alfalfa NS Sandy Loam Beet Effluent Alfalfa NS Sandy Loam Beet Effluent Tall Wheatgrass NS Sandy Loam DI Water Tall Wheatgrass NS Sandy Loam DI Water Tall Wheatgrass NS Sandy Loam DI Water Tall Wheatgrass NS Sandy Loam Beet Effluent Tall Wheatgrass NS Sandy Loam Beet Effluent Tall Wheatgrass NS Sandy Loam Beet Effluent Tall Wheatgrass LS Clay Loam DI Water Tall Wheatgrass LS Clay Loam DI Water Tall Wheatgrass LS Clay Loam DI Water Tall Wheatgrass LS Clay Loam Beet Effluent Tall Wheatgrass LS Clay Loam Beet Effluent Tall Wheatgrass LS Clay Loam Beet Effluent Plant Fresh Mean and Std. Dev. Plant Dry Mean and Std. Dev. Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation.. Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation Mean Std. Deviation