TY - JOUR

T1 - Are nitrification inhibitors effective in reducing N2O from farm-scale emission hotspots?

AU - Marsden, Kara

AU - dos Santos, Camila A

AU - Freidl, Johannes

AU - Rowlings, David W

AU - Chadwick, Dave

AU - Eckard, Richard J

PY - 2024/6/1

Y1 - 2024/6/1

N2 - Livestock congregation areas are nitrous oxide (N2O) hot-spots and could be key areas to focus mitigation action. We tested whether combined cattle urine and fertiliser N2O-N emission factors (EFs) would be higher from a farm gateway area compared to a standard pasture under sub-tropical conditions, and whether the nitrification inhibitor, dimethyl pyrazole phosphate (DMPP), would lower N2O EFs from the gateway area. Treatments (n = 3) included: (i) fertiliser applied to a standard pasture (50 kg urea-N ha−1), (ii) fertiliser (50 kg urea-N ha−1) + urine (350 kg N ha−1) applied to a standard pasture, (iii) fertiliser (50 kg urea-N ha−1) + urine (350 kg N ha−1) applied to the gateway area, and (iv) fertiliser (50 kg urea-N ha−1) + urine (350 kg N ha−1) + DMPP (1.5 kg ha−1) applied to the gateway area. Emissions were monitored via an automated static chamber-based system and 15N-labelled urine treatments (n = 4) used to assess N2O + N2 emissions, N2O:N2 and 15N recovery from the pasture. No significant differences (p > 0.05) were observed for EFs between the fertiliser + urine treatment for the standard pasture (1.10 ± 0.17%) or the gateway area (1.46 ± 0.40%). DMPP did not lower the N2O-N EF from the gateway area (1.50 ± 0.22%), where wet and warm conditions may have accelerated DMPP degradation. In the 15N-labelled urine treatments, significantly (p < 0.05) greater N2O + N2 emissions occurred in the gateway compared to the standard pasture, but disaggregating EFs between the contrasting areas was not warranted.

AB - Livestock congregation areas are nitrous oxide (N2O) hot-spots and could be key areas to focus mitigation action. We tested whether combined cattle urine and fertiliser N2O-N emission factors (EFs) would be higher from a farm gateway area compared to a standard pasture under sub-tropical conditions, and whether the nitrification inhibitor, dimethyl pyrazole phosphate (DMPP), would lower N2O EFs from the gateway area. Treatments (n = 3) included: (i) fertiliser applied to a standard pasture (50 kg urea-N ha−1), (ii) fertiliser (50 kg urea-N ha−1) + urine (350 kg N ha−1) applied to a standard pasture, (iii) fertiliser (50 kg urea-N ha−1) + urine (350 kg N ha−1) applied to the gateway area, and (iv) fertiliser (50 kg urea-N ha−1) + urine (350 kg N ha−1) + DMPP (1.5 kg ha−1) applied to the gateway area. Emissions were monitored via an automated static chamber-based system and 15N-labelled urine treatments (n = 4) used to assess N2O + N2 emissions, N2O:N2 and 15N recovery from the pasture. No significant differences (p > 0.05) were observed for EFs between the fertiliser + urine treatment for the standard pasture (1.10 ± 0.17%) or the gateway area (1.46 ± 0.40%). DMPP did not lower the N2O-N EF from the gateway area (1.50 ± 0.22%), where wet and warm conditions may have accelerated DMPP degradation. In the 15N-labelled urine treatments, significantly (p < 0.05) greater N2O + N2 emissions occurred in the gateway compared to the standard pasture, but disaggregating EFs between the contrasting areas was not warranted.

U2 - 10.1007/s10705-023-10322-9

DO - 10.1007/s10705-023-10322-9

M3 - Article

VL - 128

SP - 341

EP - 358

JO - Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems

JF - Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems

SN - 1385-1314

IS - 3

ER -