/
Blog Posts
Data extracted in July 2021
Fiche created in February 2024
Note to the reader: This general fiche summarises all the environmental and climate impacts of MANURE LAND APPLICATION TECHNIQUES found in a review of 10 synthesis papers[1]. These papers were selected from an initial number of 277 obtained through a systematic literature search strategy, according to the inclusion criteria reported in section 4. The impacts reported here are those for which there is scientific evidence available in published synthesis papers, what does not preclude the farming practice to have other impacts on the environment and climate still not covered by primary studies or by synthesis papers.
The synthesis papers review a number of primary studies ranging from 21 to 172. Therefore, the assessment of impacts relies on a large number of results from the primary studies, obtained mainly in field conditions, or sometimes in lab experiments or from model simulations.
1. DESCRIPTION OF THE FARMING PRACTICE
- Description:
- Improved manure land application techniques are used to limit nutrients losses and emissions release during land application of manure (either solid or liquid manure fractions)
- Key descriptors:
- Here, the main types of improved manure land application techniques considered are:
- Liquid manure (shallow or deep) placement/injection or solid manure (e.g. poultry litter, cattle manure) immediate incorporation
- Manure band application by trailing hoses or other equivalent systems
- Land application with additives (including mainly nitrification inhibitors, lava meal, biochar, superphosphate, sawdust)
- Land application of processed manure fractions (e.g. digestate, composted, solid fraction, liquid fraction, etc.)
- Irrigation coupled to manure application
- Avoid manure application to paddy rice fields.
- This list is not exhaustive, but covers the improved manure land application techniques found in the meta-analyses meeting the selection criteria of our review.
- Note that the overall impacts of manure processing techniques (e.g. anaerobic digestion, improved composting, solid-liquid separation, etc.) are not considered here but addressed in another group of fiches (Manure processing techniques).
2. EFFECTS OF THE FARMING PRACTICE ON CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(table 1)
The table below shows the number of synthesis papers with statistical tests reporting i) a significant difference between the Intervention and the Comparator, that is to say, a significant statistical effect, which can be positive or negative; or ii) a non-statistically significant difference between the Intervention and the Comparator. In addition, we include, if any, the number of synthesis papers reporting relevant results but without statistical test of the effects. Details on the quality assessment of the synthesis papers can be found in the methodology section of this WIKI.
Out of the 10 selected synthesis papers, 8 included studies conducted in Europe, and 9 have a quality score higher than 50%.
Table 1: Summary of effects. Number of synthesis papers reporting positive, negative or non-statistically significant effects on environmental and climate impacts. The number of synthesis papers reporting relevant results but without statistical test of the effects are also provided. When not all the synthesis papers reporting an effect are of high quality, the number of synthesis papers with a quality score of at least 50% is indicated in parentheses. Some synthesis papers may report effects for more than one impact, or more than one effect for the same impact.
|
|
|
| Statistically tested | Non-statistically tested | ||
Impact | Metric | Intervention | Comparator | Significantly positive | Significantly negative | Non-significant | |
Decrease Air pollutants emissions | NH3 | Irrigation coupled to manure application | Conventional management | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Land application with additives | Conventional management | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | ||
Land application with banding | Conventional management | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
Land application with deep placement or immediate incorporation | Conventional management | 5 | 0 | 1 | 2 (1) | ||
Decrease GHG emissions | CH4 | Land application with banding | Conventional management | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Land application with deep placement or immediate incorporation | Conventional management | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
No manure on paddy rice fields | Conventional management | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Decrease GHG emissions | N2O | Land application with additives | Conventional management | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Land application with banding | Conventional management | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
Land application with deep placement or immediate incorporation | Conventional management | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 (0) | ||
No manure on paddy rice fields | Conventional management | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
Increase Crop yield | Crop yield | Land application with banding | Conventional management | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
Land application with deep placement or immediate incorporation | Conventional management | 1 | 0 | 2 | 0 | ||
3. FACTORS INFLUENCING THE EFFECTS ON CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The factors significantly influencing the size and/or direction of the effects on the impacts, according to the synthesis papers included in this review, are reported below. Details about the factors can be found in the summaries of the meta-analyses available in this WIKI.
Table 2: List of factors reported to significantly affect the size and/or direction of the effects on environmental and climate impacts, according to the synthesis papers reviewed. The reference number of the synthesis papers where those factors are explored is given in parentheses.
Impact | Factors |
Air pollutants emissions | Livestock type (Ref2) and Manure characteristics (Ref3) |
4. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW SEARCH STRATEGY
Table 3: Systematic review search strategy - methodology and search parameters.
Parameter | Details |
Keywords | WOS: TOPIC: (manure OR slurry OR digestate OR (digested near/3 manure)) AND TOPIC: (management OR storage OR lagoon* OR "anaerobic digest*" OR tank* OR treatment OR process* OR technolog* OR techni* OR (soil near/3 application) OR (soil near/3 distribution) OR (soil near/3 amend*) OR biogas OR precision) AND TOPIC: ("meta-analy*" OR "systematic* review*" OR "evidence map" OR "global synthesis" OR "evidence synthesis" OR "research synthesis") |
Time reference | No time restriction. |
Databases | Web of Science and Scopus: run on 01 July 2021 |
Exclusion criteria | The main criteria that led to the exclusion of a synthesis paper are: |
5. SYNTHESIS PAPERS INCLUDED IN THE REVIEW
Table 4: List of synthesis papers included in this review. More details can be found in the summaries of the meta-analyses.
Ref Num | Author(s) | Year | Title | Journal | DOI |
Ref1 | Emmerling, C; Krein, A; Junk, J | 2020 | Meta-Analysis of Strategies to Reduce NH3 Emissions from Slurries in European Agriculture and Consequences for Greenhouse Gas Emissions | Agronomy 10, 1633 | 10.3390/agronomy10111633 |
Ref2 | Ti, CP; Xia, LL; Chang, SX; Yan, XY | 2019 | Potential for mitigating global agricultural ammonia emission: A meta-analysis | Environ. Pollut. 245, 141–148 | 10.1016/j.envpol.2018.10.124 |
Ref3 | Wang, Y; Xue, W; Zhu, Z; Yang, J; Li, X; Tian, Z;Dong, H; Zou, G; | 2019 | Mitigating ammonia emissions from typical broiler and layer manure management - A system analysis | Waste Management | 10.1016/j.wasman.2019.05.019 |
Ref4 | Lin, YR; Watts, DB; van Santen, E; Cao, GQ | 2018 | Influence of Poultry Litter on Crop Productivity under Different Field Conditions: A Meta-Analysis | Agron. J. 807–18 | 10.2134/agronj2017.09.0513 |
Ref5 | Sajeev, EPM; Winiwarter, W; Amon, B | 2018 | Greenhouse Gas and Ammonia Emissions from Different Stages of Liquid Manure Management Chains: Abatement Options and Emission Interactions | Journal of environmental quality | 10.2134/jeq2017.05.0199 |
Ref6 | Wang, Y; Li, XR; Yang, JF; Tian, Z; Sun, QP; Xue, WT; Dong, HM | 2018 | Mitigating Greenhouse Gas and Ammonia Emissions from Beef Cattle Feedlot Production: A System Meta-Analysis | Environmental Science & Technology | 10.1021/acs.est.8b02475 |
Ref7 | Han, Z; Walter, MT; Drinkwater, LE | 2017 | N2O emissions from grain cropping systems: a meta-analysis of the impacts of fertilizer-based and ecologically-based nutrient management strategies | NUTRIENT CYCLING IN AGROECOSYSTEMS, 107, 335-355. | 10.1007/s10705-017-9836-z |
Ref8 | Wang, Y; Dong, HM; Zhu, ZP; Gerber, PJ; Xin, HW; Smith, P; Opio, C; Steinfeld, H; Chadwick, D | 2017 | Mitigating Greenhouse Gas and Ammonia Emissions from Swine Manure Management: A System Analysis | ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY | 10.1021/acs.est.6b06430 |
Ref9 | Nkebiwe, PM; Weinmann, M; Bar-Tal, A; Muller, T | 2016 | Fertilizer placement to improve crop nutrient acquisition and yield: A review and meta-analysis | Field Crops Research 196, 389-401 | 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.07.018 |
Ref10 | Hou, Y; Velthof, GL; Oenema, O | 2015 | Mitigation of ammonia, nitrous oxide and methane emissions from manure management chains: a meta-analysis and integrated assessment | Glob. Chang. Biol. 21, 1293–1312 | 10.1111/gcb.12767 |
Disclaimer: These fiches present a large amount of scientific knowledge synthesised to assess farming practices impacts on the environment, climate and productivity. The European Commission maintains this WIKI to enhance public access to information about its initiatives. Our goal is to keep this information timely and accurate. If errors are brought to our attention, we will try to correct them. However, the Commission accepts no responsibility or liability whatsoever with regard to the information on these fiches and WIKI.
[1] Synthesis research papers include either meta-analysis or systematic reviews with quantitative results. Details can be found in the methodology section of the WIKI.