Phosphorus Chemistry and Sequestration in Soil

Similar documents
Institute of Ag Professionals

Using No-till and Cover Crops to Reduce Phosphorus Runoff

Cycling and Biogeochemical Transformations of N, P and S

Particulate Soil Phosphorus and Eutrophication in Lakes and Streams

Annual P Loss Estimator (APLE)

Phosphorus for the Ontario CCA 4R Nutrient Management Specialty

Phosphorus for the Ontario CCA 4R Nutrient Management Specialty

Cycling and Biogeochemical Transformations of N, P, S, and K

Phosphorus Dynamics and Mitigation in Soils

Nutrient Management for Vegetable Production

Land Application and Nutrient Management

Antonio Mallarino Professor, Department of Agronomy. Introduction

Using Paired Edge of Field Data to Assess Impacts of Management on Surface and Subsurface P Loss

A Presentation of the 2011 IA MN SD Drainage Research Forum. November 22, 2011 Okoboji, Iowa

Scientific registration n : 1941 Symposium n : 25 Presentation : poster. PAUTLER Maria, SIMS J. Thomas

MODELING SEDIMENT AND PHOSPHORUS YIELDS USING THE HSPF MODEL IN THE DEEP HOLLOW WATERSHED, MISSISSIPPI

Agricultural Phosphorus Management

EVALUATING SOIL PHOSPHORUS RETENTION AND RELEASE POTENTIAL ON LANDS RECEIVING PAYMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES.

NRCS s Soil Health Initiative and its Relationship to Water Quality

Nutrient Use Efficiency: A Midwest Perspective

Residue and Nutrient Management Under Reduced Tillage Systems

Daniel Moebius-Clune, Bianca Moebius-Clune, Robert Schindelbeck, Janice Thies, and Harold van Es. Soilhealth.cals.cornell.edu

Properties of Matter. Chemical Properties and Effects on Pollutant Fate. Characteristics of Chemical Changes. Physical Characteristics

New Practices for Nutrient Reduction: STRIPs and Saturated Buffers. Matthew Helmers and Tom Isenhart Iowa State University

ONE-TIME TILLAGE OF NO- TILL CROP LAND: FIVE YEARS POST-TILLAGE. Charles Wortmann

SUSTAINABLE NITROGEN FERTILIZER REGIMES FOR SNAP BEANS IN VIRGINIA

Nutrients From Cropland to Lake Erie: Perspectives from Detailed River Monitoring,

A NEW METHOD FOR INFLUENCING PHOSPHATE AVAILABILITY TO PLANTS

Vermont Phosphorus Index User Guide. version 6.0 October 2017

Gypsum-based management practises to prevent phosphorus transportation

PENNSYLVANIA PHOSPHORUS INDEX UPDATE

Herbicide Behavior in Soil Section 4

Land application of manure for water quality protection : A play in three acts

Topics Background Findings Recommendations

How Do Cover Crops Affect Fertilizer Recommendations?

Saturated Buffer. Subsurface Drainage PURPOSE N REDUCTION LOCATION COST BARRIERS

Phosphate Fertilizer Management for Irrigated Corn Production

HOW CHANGES IN NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS WILL AFFECT FORAGE PRODUCTION

Nutrient Management in. A presentation to the West Metro Water Alliance

INDICES OF PHOSPHORUS LOSS POTENTIAL FROM ONTARIO AGRICULTURAL SOILS TO SURFACE WATERS. A Thesis. Presented to. The Faculty of Graduate Studies

FACTORS AFFECTING CROP NEEDS FOR POTASSIUM WESTERN PERSPECTIVE TERRY A. TINDALL AND DALE WESTERMANN MANAGER OF AGRONOMY J.R

Outline. Farmer Goals/Needs for their Soil 1/23/2017. Compost. Challenges Using Compost. Other Support

Use of Drinking Water Treatment Residuals as a Potential Best Management I ractice to Reduce Phosphorus Risk Index Scores

Managing Soil Fertility for Sustainable Agriculture in Taihang Mountain Piedmont, North China

12/28/2016. Air. Surface Water. Ground Water. Soil. 1. Calculate agronomic rate. 2. Identify optimal fields. 3. Determine when to apply

ROCKY MOUNTAIN CERTIFIED CROP ADVISER. Local Performance Objectives For Exams and Continuing Education Programs

Biochar Field Trial in San Mateo County, California: Presented to AQWA August 29 th 2016 by Brittani Bohlke & Sara Polgar

So You ve Removed Your Phosphorus? Now What? JTAC Luncheon April 9 th, 2014

Importance of Phosphorus in Plant and Human Nutrition

PHOSPHORUS MANAGEMENT IN THE OKEECHOBEE BASIN: Legacy Phosphorus Implications to Restoration and Management

The national-level nutrient loading estimation tool for Finland: Watershed Simulation and Forecasting System WSFS-Vemala

Phosphorus Management in North Carolina. Deanna L. Osmond Department of Soil Science NC State University

Gypsum Use to Reduce P Loss From Agricultural Fields 2013

NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT. Figure 1. The availability of P is affected by soil ph.

Phosphorus Release Potential of Agricultural Soils of the United States

Wastewater Treatment Processes

What Works: Farming Practices

The Vermont Dairy Farm Sustainability Project, Inc.

33. Fate of pesticides in soil and plant.

To 4R or Not to 4R Is There an Option?

Soil ph and Liming. John E. Sawyer. Professor Soil Fertility Extension Specialist Iowa State University

APPENDIX E. LESA Models

ARE ALL fertilizers the same? Of

know and what we don t

Phosphorus Cycling, Testing and Fertilizer Recommendations

Pressures and their mechanisms governing loading of P fractions to surface waters

The implications of environmental policy on nutrient outputs in agricultural watersheds

Objective 1: Manage the demonstration site using common agricultural practices and monitor runoff quantity and quality.

SOIL P-INDEXES: MINIMIZING PHOSPHORUS LOSS. D. Beegle, J. Weld, P. Kleinman, A. Collick, T. Veith, Penn State & USDA-ARS

Review of Current Sugarcane Fertilizer Recommendations: A Report from the UF/IFAS Sugarcane Fertilizer Standards Task Force 1

Best Management Practices for Nitrogen Use in SOUTHWESTERN AND WEST-CENTRAL MINNESOTA

East TX Test Site (1/2 Treated)

Wisconsin Cranberry Board Grant Report Phase 5 Final Report: Use of Lignocellulosic Materials as Sorbents for Pesticide and Phosphate Residues

Nutrient uptake by corn and soybean, removal, and recycling with crop residue

Resources Conservation Practices Tillage, Manure Management and Water Quality

Modeling Nutrient and Sediment Losses from Cropland D. J. Mulla Dept. Soil, Water, & Climate University of Minnesota

Phosphorus Site Index (PSI) and the Phosphorus Management Tool (PMT)

D1. Sources of Nitrogen Results Overview

Watershed BMPs. Notes from NRCS online site on BMPs. Focus on key BMPs

Does Organic Matter Really Matter? Jodi DeJong-Hughes Regional Extension Educator, Willmar x 2006

The 4Rs and Potassium. Sally Flis, Ph.D., CCA. Director of Agronomy, The Fertilizer Institute, Washington, D.C.

Worksheet for Calculating Biosolids Application Rates in Agriculture

Innovative Partnerships and Educational Programs

Runoff Risk: A Decision Support Tool for Nutrient Applications

Fertilizer Management for Plant Health and Environmental Water Quality Protection

Taking the Confusion Out of Soil Testing. Bill Kreuser University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Implementation of Priority CRP Conservation Practices and Estimated Nutrient Load Reductions

Environmental Fate of Pesticides. Dr. James N. McCrimmon Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College

Availability of Nutrients in Manure Jeff Schoenau Department of Soil Science University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, SK, Canada

An Environmental Accounting System to Track Nonpoint Source Phosphorus Pollution in the Lake Champlain Basin. Year 2 Project Work Plan

Effects of Tillage on Quality of Runoff Water

and potential for future research -Perspectives from Norway Marianne Bechmann Svein Skøien Bioforsk Jord og miljø

Evaluation of Five Extraction Methods for Available Phosphorus in Intensively Fertilized Greenhouse Soils

Cropping System Nutrient Management

Gordon Johnson Janet McAllister Nevin Dawson John Jordan

Cycles of Ma,er. Lesson Overview. Lesson Overview. 3.4 Cycles of Matter

LAND APPLICATION OF SWINE MANURE

The effects of soil manganese status on the bioavailability of soil cobalt for pasture uptake in New Zealand soils

Carbon, Climate, and Energy C R I T I C A L C O N N E C T I O N S F O R A G R I C U L T U R E

Sustainability of Agro-Ecosystems: An Economist s Perspective

Transcription:

Phosphorus Chemistry and Sequestration in Soil Elizabeth (Libby) Dayton Research Scientist / Soil Environmental Chemistry School of Environment and Natural Resources Ohio State University

Today s Presentation Soil Chemical Processes Important to P sequestration and solubility / mobility / runoff / leaching Soil Testing of labile P : Crop production vs environmental soil testing Assessment Tools to predict Risk of P transport (runoff/leaching) in Ohio

Soil Phosphorus Pools Sequestered P very insoluble forms of P insoluble P minerals strongly adsorbed P Labile P P in Equilibrium with soil solution P Adsorbed (bound) P soluble P minerals Quantity Intensity Soil solution P dissolved P bioavailable P Q-I is a 2 way street replaces losses of dissolved P removes additions of soluble P Sequestered >> Quantity >> Intensity

Chemical Fate of Introduced Soluble P Fertilizer / Manure / Biosolids Additions Soluble H 2 PO 4 - Adsorption (Binding) onto soil oxide clays (Fe, Al, Mn oxides) Precipitation (Fe, Ca, Al phosphates) formation and transformation of P minerals These two mechanisms control labile P in equilibrium with soil solution (QI)

Precipitation / Dissolution of P Minerals Solubility of P-minerals limits P dissolution and availability Fe, Al phosphates at low ph (<5) % of Total Soil P Ca phosphates at high ph (5-8.5) soluble P available P insoluble P unavailable P Soil ph Very insoluble at most ph maximum solubility at ph 5 to 7 plant available P can be very low in unfertilized soil plant growth and crop yield can be limited by P

Soluble P (log scale) Does P fertilizer increase P solubility? CaHPO 4 Fertilizer P becomes CaHPO 4 in soil CaHPO 4 is metastable Eventually transforms to FePO 4, AlPO 4 or a Ca apatite stable P minerals while CaHPO 4 is still around-- enjoy a higher soluble P and plants grow well soluble P fertilizer works

Intensity Factor Effect of Q/I on P Availability / Solubility A B Mineral A Mineral B Highly soluble P minerals (fertilizer) transform into less soluble P minerals. Intensity/concentration decreases and quantity/ total soil P increases C Mineral C Quantity Perhaps this is why runoff P is often not related to soil test P

P Adsorption (binding) onto Oxide Clay Surfaces Second mechanism controlling soil P solubility, mobility and availability P adsorbs strongly to Al, Fe, Mn oxide soil surfaces O O Fe-OH Fe-OH 2 + Fe-OH 2 + + H 2 PO 4 - O O Fe-OH Fe O P OH Fe-OH 2 + O OH Dependent on reactive oxide surface availability Not concentration dependent like mineral precipitation/dissolution reactions

Dissolved vs Adsorbed P Increasing Phosphorus Loading of Soil P max Adsorption Maxima or plateau Adsorbed P Dissolved P increases with P loading of soil Dissolved P P loading of soil

Risk of P Transport in Ohio In Ohio, the risk of agricultural phosphorus (P) runoff transport into surface water is assessed by either the Ohio USDA-NRCS Phosphorus Index (P Index) Assessment Procedure or the Soil Test Risk Assessment Procedure (STRAP) within the Nitrogen and Phosphorus Risk Assessment Procedures http://efotg.nrcs.usda.gov/references/public/oh/nitrogen _and_phosphorous_risk_assessment_procedures.pdf Both are currently being reviewed

Predicting P solubility and risk Ohio NRCS P Index P Source Factors + Transport Factors = P Index Soil Test P Runoff Potential (slope) Soluble P In Distance To Stream Manure/biosolids Erosion Class, etc. The Ohio P Index combines well established factors that influence the transport of P from agricultural fields to surface waters. Each factor is evaluated based on site specific data and weighted, or modified, according to its overall effect on P transport. Each of the site sub-values are added together to establish an overall site rating, or score, of Low, Moderate, High or Very High risk

4 5 6 7 8 Phosphorus source terms / weighting factors in current Ohio P Index Soil Test P mg/kg Fertilizer Application Rate Fertilizer P 2 O 5 Application Method Organic P Application Rate Organic P 2 O 5 Application Method 0 Applied Value = 0 Bray-Kurtz-P1 mg/kg X 0.07 Planned Fertilizer P 2 O 5 Application (lbs/a) X 0.05 Immediate Incorporation OR Applied on 80% Cover Value = 0.75 Incorporation < 1 Week OR Applied on 50-80% Cover Value = 1.5 Incorporation > 1week and < 3 months OR Applied on 30-49% Cover Value = 3.0 No Incorporation or Incorporation > 3 months OR Applied on < 30% Cover Value = 6.0 Planned Manure/Biosolids P 2 O 5 Application (lbs/a) X 0.06 0 Applied Value = 0 Immediate Incorporation OR Applied on 80% Cover Value = 0.5 Incorporation < 1 Week OR Applied on 50-80% Cover Value = 1.0 Incorporation > 1week and < 3 months OR Applied on 30-49% Cover Value = 2.0 No Incorporation or Incorporation > 3 months OR Applied on < 30% Cover Value = 4.0

The Soil Test Risk Assessment Procedure (STRAP) Simpler than P Index Often used as a screening tool Used to predict risk of P transport based on the Bray- P1 extractable STP level. As STP levels increase above 150 mg/kg Bray-P1 it is presumed that their will be an increase in P transport and no additional phosphorus application is recommended. Once field STP levels exceed 150 mg/kg Bray-P, the P Index can be used to evaluate risk of P transport and it is possible that the use of the P Index may allow for additional P application.

Soil Test P (STP) Important Component for BOTH Ohio Indices Crop Sufficiency vs Environmental Risk Crop production soil tests: Measure the labile nutrient pool that will be available to the crop during some / all of the growing season Professor Bray s Requirement for a good soil test (1948) 1. Extract a proportionate part of plant available forms of nutrient from different soils 2. Extracted nutrients should correlate with uptake of nutrient and crop yield Is it appropriate to extrapolate soil fertility test data to predict risk of P transport to surface water (runoff/leaching)?

Using Crop Production Soil Tests as Environmental Soil Tests 100% Crop Yield Production Break point Soil Test P Dissolved P Runoff P P leaching Environmental Identify soil test level break point where P solubility begins to increase rapidly if there is one Set STP limit at break point to minimize soluble P Problems: Are we confident where the break point is? What depth is the soil sampled to?

Typical Soil Profile Soil Depth and P Sorption A Horizon zone of organic matter accumulation Typically less clay than B horizon lower P sorption than B horizon B Horizon zone of clay (oxide) accumulation increase in P adsorption decrease in soluble P Non conservation tillage: P incorporation 6 to 8 inch depth Surface fertilizer application or Conservation tillage: incorporation of P (< 2 inch) more P in A horizon which has lower sorption capacity. Potential for increased soluble P at the surface

Environmental P Soil Tests Dissolved P Runoff P P leaching Break point Environmental Soil Test P Similar approach evaluate other test methods not necessarily correlated to crop yield. Evaluate surface (0-2 in) soil sampling vs agronomic soil sampling (0-8 in) to determine which (if either) best predicts risk of P transport (runoff / leaching)

Current and Future Research Goals Evaluate (validate) and if necessary revise P Index P source terms [Soil test P (STP), P application rate, and P application methods] Weighting/modifying factors to make P Risk Index more quantitative The threshold STP level of 150mg P/kg used in STRAP to predict P transport risk. Results could be directly applied toward revising Ohio P assessment tools as necessary.

Long-term experiment at: Waterman Research Farm Columbus, OH no-till, silt loam CIG: Grand Lake St Mary s: Mercer County Celina, OH no-till, silt loam GLNPO-R4 Sandusky Watershed mixed tillage silt loam and silty clay loam GLNPO-R5, Robert Mullen Maumee watershed mixed tillage, silty clay loam

Questions?? Libby Dayton, dayton.15@osu.edu School of Environment and Natural Resources www.snr.osu.edu Kottman Hall