Nutrient Transport of Fertilizers from Turfed Landscapes
Transcript of Nutrient Transport of Fertilizers from Turfed Landscapes
Nutrient Transport of Fertilizers from Turfed Landscapes
Marty Petrovic Professor of Turfgrass Science Dept. of Horticulture Cornell University
What will be covered Transport Processes Water flow Soluble nutrients Sources Turfs Role in Nutrient Transport Water flow Nutrient fate Landscape types Management Factors Affecting Transport
What will be covered Management Factors Affecting Transport Maintaining plant density Fertilization practices Sources Rates Timing Other management options Grass selection Irrigation Clippings Research Questions
Water flow-nutrient movement
Impacts to and surface water quality from:
• Atmospheric Deposition
• Wastewater (sewage disposal systems)
• Fertilizer
Fertilizer
bb
runoff
leaching
ET
Inputs of Nutrients in a Turfgrass System
Inputs: Fertilizer Plant debris (tree leaves, etc)
Compost Rainfall Irrigation water Dust Pollen Pet waste Wildlife
What will be covered Transport Processes Water flow Soluble nutrients Sources Turfs Role in Nutrient Transport Water flow Nutrient fate Landscape types Management Factors Affecting Transport
Pathways of Nitrogen Movement in a Turfgrass System
Soil Organic Nitrogen (SON)
Fertilizer ApplicationBNF
ClippingsN2O Denitrification
Runoff
NO3
Leachate
Plant Uptake NO3 / NH4
Mineralization R- NH2→ NH4→ NO3
&Nitrification to NO3
Volatilization
Immobilizatiizationto R—NH2
Immobilizatiizationto R—NH2
NO3
Leachate
Surface water
Pathways of Phosphorus Movement in a Turfgrass System
Source: Mississippi State Extension
Landscape type and runoff volume
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
High Maint. Turf Wooded Low Maint. Turf
Ru
no
ff (
mm
)
Winter
Fall
Summer
Spring
Easton & Petrovic, 2008, 2 yr amount during wet years
On sites with moderate to low potential for runoff, high maintenance lawns had
about half the amount of total P runoff compared to unfertilized low maintenance lawns and wooded sites
On sites with high potential for runoff, high maintenance lawns had: * about 3 times the amount of dissolved P * ¼ the amount of particulate P *the same amount of total P in runoff compared to unfertilized low maintenance lawns and wooded sites
Suburbanization: *increased the average concentration of P in a perennial stream *reduced the N concentration
Lawn types and nutrient fate
• 5 inches wide x 4 ft long channel gutter at the bottom of 4 ft x 20 ft plots
• Drains into tipping buckets
– Recorded with event logger
• Subsamples collected &
bulked monthly
Treatments (8 lawn types) – Kentucky bluegrass sod+ pesticides, fertilizer, and
irrigation – Turfgrass + pesticides, and fertilizer – Turfgrass + fertilizer – Turfgrass (only mowed)
• 3 lbs N 1000 sq.ft.-1 yr-1 • 0.3 lbs P2O5 1000 sq.ft.-1 yr-1
• 2,4-D, MCPP, Bifenthrin, and Pendimethalin • 4 applications yr-1
– Crabgrass – Turfgrass + Crabgrass (1:1) – Broadleaf weedy lawn(dandelion, plantain, clover) – Turfgrass + Broadleaf weeds (1:1)
• Turfgrass, Broadleaf, and Mixture plots established from sod • Crabgrass plots established from seed and reseeded annually
Leachate volume by lawn type
Treatment
Bro
ad+
Turf
Bro
adle
af
Cra
b+
Tu
rf
Cra
bg
rass
Turf
Turf
+F
Turf
+P
+F
Turf
+P
+F
+I
Tota
l le
acha
te (
mm
)
0
100
200
300
400
500
B
ABAB
A A AA
AB
Total Precipitation 1153 mm
Slavens, 2010
Total Runoff by lawn type
Total Runoff
Treatment
Bro
ad
lea
f+tu
rf
Bro
ad
lea
f
Cra
bg
rass+
turf
Cra
bg
rass
Turf
gra
ss
Turf
gra
ss+
F
Tu
rfg
rass+
F+
P
Turf
gra
ss+
F+
P+
I
Runoff V
olu
me (
mm
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140A
ABC
BC
ABC
ABC
C
C
AB
Total Precipitation 1153 mm
Slavens, 2010
Results from the 1st two years:
• Regardless of type of lawn, lawns with low plant density and wet soils had the highest amount of runoff
• Runoff volumes and nutrient losses were most significant during establishment period and greatly decreased with time
• Phosphorus loss in runoff is primarily a function of runoff volume, more water running off more phosphorus runoff
Results continued
• If you don’t fertilizer a Kentucky blue grass lawn, in 2 yrs it has runoff problems!
• If not overly irrigated, a lawn fertilized and maintained according to a typical four step program, posses no greater risk water quality (nutrients) from being fertilized compared to other lawn types.
Sink for Nitrogen in a Turfgrass Soils
(1.7 lbs N/1000 sq.ft/yr)
(top 3.3 ft of soil)
Steve M. Raciti, Ph.D. Thesis 2010, Cornell Univ., Baltimore Long Term Urban Ecosystem Study
Mass Balance Nitrogen in Residential Soils
Steve M. Raciti, Ph.D. Thesis 2010, Cornell Univ., Baltimore Long Term Urban Ecosystem Study
Nitrogen Mass Balance
Residential Forest Source
N Inputs
Atmospheric Dep (lbs
N/acre/yr) 9.7 9.7 Groffman et al. 2004
Fertilizer (lbs N/acre/yr) 72.7 N/A Law et al. 2004
N Losses
Leaching (lbs N/acre/yr) 12.3 3.8 Groffman et al. 2009
(4 yr average)
N Sequestration
N accumulation in SOM (lbs
N/acre/yr)
72.4 N/A Residential sites with
agricultural land-use
history.
What will be covered Management Factors Affecting Transport Maintaining plant density Fertilization practices Sources Rates Timing Other management options Grass selection Irrigation Clippings Research Questions
Turfgrass Density and Runoff:
Double the amount of turf shoots in a lawn (32 to 64/sq.inch) and
reduce the amount of runoff by 2/3
(Easton, Z.M., and A.M. Petrovic. 2004. Fertilizer source effect on ground
and surface water quality in drainage from turfgrass. J Environ Qual 33: 645-656.)
Fertilization:
Sources
Rates (limited information)
Timing (others)
Nitrogen Source Impact Percent of applied nitrogen that leached as a function of nitrogen source (4 lbs N/1000 sq ft/yr). Source Year1 Year 2 Year3 mean -----------------------------------------% ------------------------------------------- ureaformaldehyde 4.0 ab* 4.2 2.9 b 3.7 b methylene urea 1.7 ab 4.6 6.7 b 4.6 b IBDU 1.9 ab 6.9 4.1 b 4.9 b SC- urea-non wax 4.9 ab 4.8 4.8 b 4.8 b SC urea-wax 1.7 ab 7.4 5.8 b 5.4 b urea 1.6 b 4.1 12.1 b 6.1 b
calcium nitrate 0.9 b 5.0 29.7 a 12.5 a PC-urea (100day) 2.4 ab 6.4 4.1 b 4.2 b PC-urea (200day) 0.5 c 3.1 2.5 b 2.0 b biosolid 5.6 a 3.9 2.2 b 3.7 b NS** Rainfall (mm) 747 1213 1512 * Means within columns followed by different letter are significant (P<0.05), Tukey’s studentized
test. ** NS=no significant differences (P<0.05). Petrovic, 2003.
Sources of P Kussow, 2008
Fertilizer Amount
Source Runoff P
in/yr lbs/acre/yr
None 1.6 0.62
Synthetic 1.1 0.27
Organic 0.7 0.24
LSD 0.2 0.12
Irrigation Impact Nitrogen Irrigation Amount amount NO3-N Conc. lbs N/1000
sq.ft./yr in/wk mg/L 2 0.5+ 0.9 1.5 1.8* 5 0.5 1.2 1.5 4.0* unfertilized 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.4 + ET amount * Significantly higher than unfertilized control. Morton et. al.
(1988) on Poa pratensis, Festuca rubra, urea + FLUF
Summary of risk
Fertilizing at establishment
Late fall applications
Over irrigation
Thin stands of plants
Site factors (soils, hydrology,etc)
Others
Research Needs
Low input grasses
Rates (turf response vs water quality)
Late fall (timing, rates vs water quality)
Determining when to fertilizer (N)