Search

The effect of straw and vinasses on the N mineralization–immobilization turnover of celery residues was investigated in a field experiment in Flanders (Belgium). The field was laid out in raised beds on a loamy sand soil. At the start of the experiment, 15N-labelled celery residues (4t dry matter (DM)ha−1) were mixed with straw (12tDMha−1) in order to immobilize the released celery-N followed by an incorporation of vinasses (4tDMha−1) after 200 days aiming to remineralize the immobilized N. Total N, mineral N and their 15N enrichments as well as microbial biomass N were determined at regular time intervals. During the first 62 days after the incorporation, straw immobilized the celery derived 15N in the microbial biomass and reduced the total celery-15N losses from the top 25cm by 38%. However, after 62 days, the N immobilization ceased due to low temperatures (<10°C) in the raised beds, and was followed by natural remineralization of immobilized celery-15N (without addition of vinasses) at a moment when the risk of nitrate leaching was still high. Hence, straw was not able to reduce the celery-N losses during the complete winter period. The addition of vinasses in spring caused no real positive priming effect, although it did increase the amount of remineralized celery-15N (7.6% of celery derived 15N) compared to the straw treatment without vinasses (1.7% of celery derived 15N) probably due to an apparent added nitrogen interaction caused by displacement reactions with the soil microbial biomass. In conclusion, in raised beds, it is not possible to reduce nitrate leaching and to achieve a synchronization between the N release from crop residues and N demand by the following crop by using straw and vinasses to manipulate the N release from crop residues. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Diffuse groundwater contamination by intense fertilizer use is a widespread problem in most of the agricultural regions in West-Europe and in many other countries worldwide. As a result elevated nitrate concentrations in groundwater are found, and as groundwater is the source of baseflow into rivers and streams, also surface waters show increased nitrate levels. Flanders in the north of Belgium is no exception and despite restrictions on the fertilizer use and remediation practices initiated in the mid-1990s, and still ongoing, in many stream monitoring points, peak concentrations are measured above the 50 mg/l criterium. In many monitoring stations there is apparently a long delay between the start of the restrictions and effect on water quality. Often this delay is related to high concentrations in the groundwater inflow and long residence and travel times of groundwater feeding the streams. To better understand this behavior and estimate response times a tool was developed that incorporates the main water flows in a typical catchment and considers the effects of varying groundwater ages. This tool is conceived as a parsimonious lumped parameter model, simple and easy enough to be used by many people but still capturing the main mechanisms end processes. In this paper the tool is explained and it is applied on two testcases in Flanders to show its performance. • Presenting a model for simulating nitrate concentrations in surface waters (streams, rivers) at catchment scale due to inflow of nitrate rich groundwater. • Consists of a root zone model for nitrate leaching on a parcel scale and a saturated zone model at the catchment scale. • Uses fractioning of the groundwater flow in different components. • Conceived as a lumped parameters model with a minimum of parameters • Results are presented for 2 catchments, but the model has been tested on 10 sites in different hydrogeological settings [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• After two decades, 60 croplands in Flanders were resampled to assess SOC evolution. • Two decades of aboveground residue incorporation did not increase SOC. • The humification coefficient of maize-C in MS was twice as high as in MG fields. • The stability of maize-C formed on the long-term under MS and MG fields was similar. The few available studies on maize biomass in soil of field experiments have shown that belowground maize biomass resides more than twice as long as aboveground residues. Our principal objective was to investigate the effect of maize crop residue incorporation on the long-term dynamics of soil organic carbon (SOC) for a selection of croplands with sandy to sandy loam texture in Flanders, Belgium. After a period of more than 20 years, we resampled 31 and 29 parcels that had either silage maize (MS, only belowground biomass input) or grain maize (MG, both above- and belowground biomass input) dominated crop rotations. Changes in maize-derived SOC (C maize) of MS and MG systems between 1993 and 2018 were evaluated by detecting SOC content and its δ 13C value. In addition, a 140-day incubation experiment (at 20.5 °C) was carried out to compare the stability of C maize and the related nitrogen (N) mineralization between the MG and MS fields. After two decades, δ 13C raised 2.4 and 2.6‰, while C maize increased 1.6 and 2.2 g kg−1 in MS and MG systems, respectively. The estimated average humification coefficient over this period of maize-C was 0.11 for the MS system, about twice as that of the MG system (0.06). This reconfirms findings of stronger contribution of belowground biomass versus aboveground residues to stabilized SOC pools over the medium to long term. By the end of the incubation, on average 10.4% and 11.6% of C maize had been decomposed in the MS and MG soils, respectively. These C maize mineralization rates were statistically equal for the two systems, which indicates that mainly belowground biomass remained in the soils. Also, net N mineralization was indifferent to the crop rotations (MS: 58.8 mg N kg−1 and MG: 52.6 mg N kg−1). To reconcile the two main observations in this study, we hypothesize that the lower preservation of shoot-C could be manifested on a shorter term. Detailed research is needed to determine the time scale of increased stabilization of root-C versus shoot-C under field conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]