Abstract
Municipal sewage sludge has a lot of organic matter and is a rich source of nutrients, thus generating interest as a cheap fertilizer. The amount of the sewage sludge dose used in agriculture to fertilize crops is determined by law and its application should be in accordance with the rules of the EU. The problem is to determine the rate of release of nutrients from sewage sludge and intake speed of these components by the plants. The aim of this study was to evaluate the agricultural use of sewage sludge in the year of application and its residual effect in maize grown for silage. Maize variety 'PR39G12' was grown in the field after 5-year monoculture. Experiments were carried out according to the scheme: the control - without sewage sludge (mineral fertilizers); sewage sludge - the year of application, sewage sludge - the first year after application; sewage sludge - the second year after application. Sewage sludge was applied in the spring at a dose of 10 tonnes D.M.·ha -1 , which was tested both in terms of microbial and heavy metal content. The amount of sewage sludge applied dose was in line with the regulations of Minister of Environment at that time (Directive... 2002) which allows the use of sludge in applied amount once every 5 years. Years in which the study was conducted were characterized by high volatility of weather conditions. There were significant differences in the amount and distribution of rainfall and the considerable volatility in the course of temperature in different periods of plant development. In the two years of the study (2006 and 2008) on the treatments where sewage sludge was applied in the first year, a trend of fewer plant losses was noted compared with plants with mineral fertilizer applied. Below-cob leaf greenness index showed no difference between the plants grown on mineral fertilizers and municipal sewage sludge, but the use of municipal sewage sludge contributed to cob set up. On the treatments fertilized with sewage sludge, plant productivity as fresh and dry matter yield of total maize plants was higher than on treatments with mineral fertilization.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 4
Claim · model-written summary
In the first year after sewage sludge application, maize showed a trend of fewer plant losses than with mineral fertilizer.
- Material
- PR39G12e0
- Treatment
- sewage sludge was applied in the first yeare1
- Outcome
- plant lossese1
- Direction
- fewere1
- Comparator
- mineral fertilizer appliede1
- Setting
- in the fielde0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize variety 'PR39G12' was grown in the field after 5-year monoculture”
e1“In the two years of the study (2006 and 2008) on the treatments where sewage sludge was applied in the first year, a trend of fewer plant losses was noted compared with plants with mineral fertilizer applied”
Claim · model-written summary
Below-cob leaf greenness index showed no difference between maize fertilised with municipal sewage sludge and with mineral fertilizers.
- Organ / stage
- Below-cob leafe2
- Treatment
- municipal sewage sludgee2
- Outcome
- greenness indexe2
- Direction
- no differencee2
- Comparator
- mineral fertilizerse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize variety 'PR39G12' was grown in the field after 5-year monoculture”
e2“Below-cob leaf greenness index showed no difference between the plants grown on mineral fertilizers and municipal sewage sludge”
Claim · model-written summary
Municipal sewage sludge contributed to maize cob set up compared with mineral fertilizers.
- Treatment
- municipal sewage sludgee3
- Outcome
- cob set upe3
- Direction
- contributede3
- Comparator
- mineral fertilizerse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize variety 'PR39G12' was grown in the field after 5-year monoculture”
e2“Below-cob leaf greenness index showed no difference between the plants grown on mineral fertilizers and municipal sewage sludge”
e3“the use of municipal sewage sludge contributed to cob set up”
Claim · model-written summary
Fresh and dry matter yield of total maize plants was higher with sewage sludge than with mineral fertilization.
- Treatment
- fertilized with sewage sludgee4
- Outcome
- plant productivity as fresh and dry matter yield of total maize plantse4
- Direction
- highere4
- Comparator
- mineral fertilizatione4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize variety 'PR39G12' was grown in the field after 5-year monoculture”
e4“On the treatments fertilized with sewage sludge, plant productivity as fresh and dry matter yield of total maize plants was higher than on treatments with mineral fertilization”
The same questions in other papers
organic · survival · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
organic · physiology: pigments · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
20 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 papers →organic · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 32 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
369 papers more in this group
See all 373 papers →fertilization · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3,484 papers in the same direction as this paper · 338 in the opposite direction · 85 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
3,904 papers more in this group
See all 3,908 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.