Physical and chemical changes in soil fertilized with poultry manure with and without chiseling

Eguchi, Edson S.; Cecato, Ulysses; Muniz, Antonio S.; Mari, Gracielle C.; Murano, Raphael A. C.; Sousa Neto, Eurico L. de

doi:10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v20n4p316-321

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

SOIL, WATER AND PLANT MANAGEMENT • Rev. bras. eng. agríc. ambient. 20 (4) • Apr 2016 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v20n4p316-321 copy

Physical and chemical changes in soil fertilized with poultry manure with and without chiseling

Alterações físicas e químicas em solo fertilizado com esterco de galinha em diferentes manejos

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Poultry manure and mechanical management may influence the distribution of nutrients in the soil profile. The objective was to evaluate physical and chemical changes in a soil with palisade grass ( Brachiaria brizantha cv. Marandu) fertilized with doses of poultry manure with and without use of soil chiseling, after 180 days of application. The design was a randomized blocks with four replicates, in a 5 x 2 factorial arrangement with five doses of manure (0, 1.073, 2.074, 4.148 and 6.222 Mg ha^-1), with and without soil chiseling at 0.20 m. Soil chiseling caused physical changes with an increase of macroporosity in the layer of 0-0.2 m and reduction in soil density and increase in macroporosity and total porosity in the layer of 0.2-0.4 m. With manure doses, pH in the layer of 0-0.1 m showed quadratic fit with maximum value of 7.2. The increases in Ca and Zn in the layer of 0-0.1 m were, respectively, 0.61 cmol_c dm^-3 and 2.99 mg dm^-3. In the interaction of Dose x Management, without soil chiseling, K showed a linear fit and increased 1.39 times; while in the interaction of Dose x Management, with soil chiseling in the layers of 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, P increased by 8.10 and 3.95 mg dm^-3, respectively. In the contrast between the dose zero and manure dose, there was significance for pH, Ca, P and Zn in the layer of 0-0.1 m.

Key words:
palisade grass; fertilization; forage cultivation; residue

Management	DS1 (kg dm^-3)	MAC1	MIC1	Pt1	Ks (cm s^-1)	DS2 (kg dm^-3)	MAC2	MIC2	Pt2
Management	DS1 (kg dm^-3)	(m³ m^-3)			Ks (cm s^-1)	DS2 (kg dm^-3)	(m³ m^-3)
n	1.43	0.12 a	0.31	0.44	0.04	1.70 b	0.06 a	0.27	0.33 a
c	1.42	0.16 b	0.30	0.47	0.07	1.60 a	0.11 b	0.27	0.39 b
Mean	1.43	0.14	0.31	0.45	0.06	1.65	0.06	0.27	0.26
CV (%)	6.53	23.44	6.37	9.29	76.75	5.75	45.61	9.99	14.17
Error	0.02	0.008	0.004	0.010	0.01	0.02	0.01	0.006	0.01

Parameter Layer		Dose (Mg ha^-1)				0	Mean	CV (%)	Effect
Parameter Layer		1.037	2.074	4.148	6.222	0	Mean	CV (%)	Effect
pH (H₂O)	1	6.32 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	6.51	6.83	6.83	6.12	6.52	3.40	^* * Effect of the dose;
	2	5.53 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	5.67	5.91	5.91	5.37	5.68	4.88	^* * Effect of the dose;
	3	5.66 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	5.66 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	5.55 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	5.56 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	5.59	5.60	5.46
H + Al (cmol_cdm^-3)	1	2.36 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	2.26 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	1.98 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	2.13 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	2.35	2.21	13.58
	2	2.38 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	2.32 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	2.25 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	2.22 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	2.45	2.32	7.43
	3	3.08 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	3.14 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	3.14 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	3.17 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	3.14	3.13	5.98
Ca (cmol_c dm^-3)	1	1.20 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	1.31	1.54	1.82	1.02	1.37	15.84	^* * Effect of the dose;
	2	0.59 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.54 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.53 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.71	0.44	0.61	20.92	^ Interaction of Dose x Management with (c) and without (n) chiseling n
	2	0.50 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.63 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.90 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.72 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.64	0.61	20.92	^ Interaction of Dose x Management with (c) and without (n) chiseling c
	3	0.55 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.54 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.52 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.66 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.62	0.57	23.21
Mg (cmol_c dm^-3)	1	0.87 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.88 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.91 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	1.06 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.70	0.88	28.99
	2	0.26 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.28 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.34 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.32 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.23	0.28	30.98
	3	0.26 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.26 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.21 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.27 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.28	0.25	24.79
K (cmol_c dm^-3)	1	0.18 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.21 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.19 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.22 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.16	0.19	31.23
	2	0.08 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.14 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.11 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.12 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.09	0.10	45.61
	3	0.06 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.10 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.07 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.09 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	0.05	0.07	64.94
P (mg dm^-3)	1	12.23^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	23.95^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	42.95	86.73	7.49	34.66	89.81	^* * Effect of the dose;
	2	2.33 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	3.78 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	2.38 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	3.48 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	1.03	4.49	58.71	^ Interaction of Dose x Management with (c) and without (n) chiseling n
	2	3.52 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	3.82 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	10.02	11.62	2.95	4.49	58.71	^ Interaction of Dose x Management with (c) and without (n) chiseling c
	3	2.56 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	3.39 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	2.26 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	4.53 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	2.65	3.07	53.25
Zn (mg dm^-3)	1	7.15 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	7.55 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	8.31	10.14	6.33	7.89	24.89	^* * Effect of the dose;
	2	2.76 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	3.16 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	3.63 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	3.40 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	2.46	3.08	36.51
	3	1.14 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	1.28 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	1.36 ^NS NS Contrast not significant between control and poultry manure dose by F test (P > 0.05); 1, 2 and 3 - layers of 0-0.1, 0.1-0.2 and 0.2-0.4 m, respectively;	1.64	1.12	1.30	26.56	^* * Effect of the dose;

Unidade Acadêmica de Engenharia Agrícola Unidade Acadêmica de Engenharia Agrícola, UFCG, Av. Aprígio Veloso 882, Bodocongó, Bloco CM, 1º andar, CEP 58429-140, Campina Grande, PB, Brasil, Tel. +55 83 2101 1056 - Campina Grande - PB - Brazil
E-mail: revistagriambi@gmail.com

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] eguchi@unemat.br (Corresponding author)