Partial replacement of mineral fertilisers (MF) with animal manures is a good alternative to reduce MF use and increase both nutrient cycling in agriculture and soil organic matter. However, the adoption of this practice must not lead to increased environmental impacts. In this two-year study conducted in an apple orchard, MF were partially replaced with various animal manures, including cattle slurry (CS), acidified cattle slurry (ACS), solid cattle manure (CsM), or poultry manure (PM), and their impacts on greenhouse gas emission (GHG: CO2, N2O and CH4) were examined. A control (CTRL) receiving only MF served as the baseline, representing the conventional scenario in orchard fertilisation. Overall, replacing MF with manures increased GHG emissions, with the magnitude of the impacts depending on the specific characteristics of the manures and the amount of nutrients and organic matter applied. Comparing to the CTRL, application of ACS and CS led to higher CH4 and N2O emissions, while PM application increased both N2O and CO2 emissions. In contrast, replacement with PM and CsM decreased CH4 emissions. Nevertheless, results varied between the two years, influenced by several factors, including soil conditions. While acidification showed potential to mitigate CH4 emissions, it also led to increased N2O emissions compared to CS, particularly in 2022, suggesting the need for further investigation to avoid emission trade-offs. Replacement with CS (20.49 t CO2-eq ha-1) and CsM (20.30 t CO2-eq ha-1) showed comparable global warming potential (GWP) to the conventional scenario (CTRL, 19.49 t CO2-eq ha-1), highlighting their potential as viable MF substitutes.
Keywords: Emission factors; Global warming potential; Manure; Soil nitrogen; Yield-scaled GHG emissions.
Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.