Paper · 2017 · Agronomy Journal

Field‐Scale Evaluation of Biosolids‐Derived Organomineral Fertilizers Applied to Winter Wheat in England

Diogenes L. Antille; Richard J. Godwin; Ruben Sakrabani; et al.

20
claims
47
verbatim quotes
53
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Core Ideas Agronomic efficiency of organomineral fertilizers higher than biosolids granules. Organomineral fertilizers reduces the risk of soil P build‐up compared with biosolids. Conversion of sewage sludge into organomineral fertilizers improves the fertilizer value of biosolids. Field‐scale experiments in four crop seasons established the agronomic performance of biosolids‐derived organomineral fertilizers (OMF) for winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England. Two OMF formulations (OMF 10 10:4:4 and OMF 15 15:4:4) were compared with urea and biosolids granules (≈5:6:0.2) to determine crop responses and fertilizer effects on soil chemical properties. Fertilizers were applied at N rates between 0 and 250 kg ha −1 at regular increments of 50 kg ha −1 N. Average grain yields with OMF 10 and OMF 15 were higher than with biosolids granules, but lower than with urea ( P < 0.05). The optimum N application rates, and corresponding grain yields, were 245 and 7900 kg ha −1 for biosolids, 257 and 9100 kg ha −1 for OMF 10 , 249 and 9500 kg ha −1 for OMF 15 , and 225 and 10350 kg ha −1 for urea, respectively. Differences in grain yield between fertilizer treatments were explained by differences in yield components, particularly number of grains and thousand‐grain‐weight. Grain‐N recoveries were 31% for biosolids, ≈40% for OMF, and 52% for urea. Organomineral fertilizers‐induced changes in soil extractable P and soil P Index were not significant. Thus, application of OMF replenished P offtake by the crop and therefore supported the choice of the proposed OMF formulations. By contrast, extractable P increased in biosolids and decreased in urea‐treated soils, respectively. Heavy metals in soil were unaffected by fertilizer treatment and lower than permissible limit values. The use of OMF for winter wheat production appears to be a sustainable approach to recycling biosolids to land.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 20

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

OMF 10 grain yield exceeded biosolids granules but was below urea.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
OMF 10e0
Outcome
grain yieldse0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
lower than with ureae0
Comparator
biosolids granulese0
Setting
Englande1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Average grain yields with OMF 10 and OMF 15 were higher than with biosolids granules, but lower than with urea ( P < 0.05).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 779–902 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

OMF 15 grain yield exceeded biosolids granules but was below urea.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
OMF 15e0
Outcome
grain yieldse0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
lower than with ureae0
Comparator
biosolids granulese0
Setting
Englande1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Average grain yields with OMF 10 and OMF 15 were higher than with biosolids granules, but lower than with urea ( P < 0.05).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 779–902 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biosolids had optimum nitrogen application of 245 kg per hectare.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume2
Treatment
biosolidse1
Outcome
optimum N application ratese1
Value
245e1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“245 and 7900 kg ha −1 for biosolids”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 973–1008 · show in text ↑
e1

“The optimum N application rates, and corresponding grain yields, were 245 and 7900 kg ha −1 for biosolids”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 903–1008 · show in text ↑
e2

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

OMF 10 optimum nitrogen application rate was 257.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume2
Treatment
OMF 10e1
Outcome
optimum N application ratese1
Value
257e1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“257 and 9100 kg ha −1 for OMF 10”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1010–1042 · show in text ↑
e1

“The optimum N application rates, and corresponding grain yields, were 245 and 7900 kg ha −1 for biosolids, 257 and 9100 kg ha −1 for OMF 10”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 903–1042 · show in text ↑
e2

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

OMF 15 optimum nitrogen application rate was 249.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume2
Treatment
OMF 15e1
Outcome
optimum N application ratese1
Value
249e1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“249 and 9500 kg ha −1 for OMF 15”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1045–1077 · show in text ↑
e1

“The optimum N application rates, and corresponding grain yields, were 245 and 7900 kg ha −1 for biosolids, 257 and 9100 kg ha −1 for OMF 10 , 249 and 9500 kg ha −1 for OMF 15”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 903–1077 · show in text ↑
e2

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea optimum nitrogen application rate was 225.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume2
Treatment
ureae1
Outcome
optimum N application ratese3
Value
225e1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“225 and 10350 kg ha −1 for urea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1084–1115 · show in text ↑
e1

“and 225 and 10350 kg ha −1 for urea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1080–1115 · show in text ↑
e2

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
e3

“The optimum N application rates, and corresponding grain yields, were 245 and 7900 kg ha −1 for biosolids”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 903–1008 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biosolids optimum grain yield was 7900 kg ha −1.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
biosolidse0
Outcome
grain yieldse0
Value
7900 kg ha −1e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The optimum N application rates, and corresponding grain yields, were 245 and 7900 kg ha −1 for biosolids”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 903–1008 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

OMF 10 optimum grain yield was 9100 kg ha −1.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume2
Treatment
OMF 10e0
Outcome
grain yieldse1
Value
9100 kg ha −1e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“257 and 9100 kg ha −1 for OMF 10”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1010–1042 · show in text ↑
e1

“corresponding grain yields, were 245 and 7900 kg ha −1 for biosolids, 257 and 9100 kg ha −1 for OMF 10”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 940–1042 · show in text ↑
e2

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

OMF 15 optimum grain yield was 9500 kg ha −1.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume2
Treatment
OMF 15e0
Outcome
grain yieldse1
Value
9500 kg ha −1e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“249 and 9500 kg ha −1 for OMF 15”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1045–1077 · show in text ↑
e1

“corresponding grain yields, were 245 and 7900 kg ha −1 for biosolids, 257 and 9100 kg ha −1 for OMF 10 , 249 and 9500 kg ha −1 for OMF 15”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 940–1077 · show in text ↑
e2

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea optimum grain yield was 10350 kg ha −1.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume2
Treatment
ureae0
Outcome
grain yieldse1
Value
10350 kg ha −1e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“and 225 and 10350 kg ha −1 for urea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1080–1115 · show in text ↑
e1

“corresponding grain yields, were 245 and 7900 kg ha −1 for biosolids, 257 and 9100 kg ha −1 for OMF 10 , 249 and 9500 kg ha −1 for OMF 15 , and 225 and 10350 kg ha −1 for urea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 940–1115 · show in text ↑
e2

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain number and thousand-grain weight explained fertilizer yield differences.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Outcome
Differences in grain yielde0
Qualifier
differences in yield components, particularly number of grains and thousand‐grain‐weighte0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Differences in grain yield between fertilizer treatments were explained by differences in yield components, particularly number of grains and thousand‐grain‐weight.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1131–1295 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain nitrogen recovery was 31% with biosolids.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
biosolidse0
Outcome
Grain‐N recoveriese0
Value
31%e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Grain‐N recoveries were 31% for biosolids”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1296–1337 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain nitrogen recovery was about 40% with OMF.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
OMFe0
Outcome
Grain‐N recoveriese0
Value
≈40%e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Grain‐N recoveries were 31% for biosolids, ≈40% for OMF”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1296–1351 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain nitrogen recovery was 52% with urea.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
ureae0
Outcome
Grain‐N recoveriese0
Value
52%e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Grain‐N recoveries were 31% for biosolids, ≈40% for OMF, and 52% for urea.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1296–1370 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

OMF caused no significant change in soil extractable phosphorus and P Index.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
Organomineral fertilizerse0
Outcome
soil extractable P and soil P Indexe0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Organomineral fertilizers‐induced changes in soil extractable P and soil P Index were not significant.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1371–1473 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biosolids increased soil extractable phosphorus.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
biosolidse0
Outcome
extractable Pe0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“extractable P increased in biosolids”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1615–1651 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea decreased soil extractable phosphorus.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
ureae0
Outcome
extractable Pe0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“extractable P increased in biosolids and decreased in urea‐treated soils”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1615–1687 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil heavy metals were unaffected by fertilizer and below permissible limits.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Treatment
fertilizer treatmente0
Outcome
Heavy metals in soile0
Direction
unaffectede0
Qualifier
lower than permissible limit valuese0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Heavy metals in soil were unaffected by fertilizer treatment and lower than permissible limit values.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1703–1804 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors support organomineral fertilizer formulations because they replenish crop phosphorus offtake.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
Outcome
choice of the proposed OMF formulationse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“application of OMF replenished P offtake by the crop and therefore supported the choice of the proposed OMF formulations.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1480–1601 · show in text ↑
e1

“winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production in England.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 423–482 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors regard OMF for winter wheat as a sustainable way to recycle biosolids.

Taxon
winter wheatTriticum aestivume0
Outcome
use of OMF for winter wheat productione0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The use of OMF for winter wheat production appears to be a sustainable approach to recycling biosolids to land.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1805–1916 · show in text ↑

fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

3,438 papers: 3,115 positive, 323 negative or no effect

3,114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive

3,434 papers more in this group

See all 3,438 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.