Application of manure is based on site-specific management units as defined by previously field variability. (Francesco Morari (DAFNAE - University of Padova))

Variable rate biosolids management (Italy)

Applicazione dose-variabile di ammendanti organici

Description

Application of precision farming and variable rate application technology for spatial optimization of organic amendments use

Generally, precision farming aims to increase the efficiency of cropping systems by understanding and dealing with the natural variability of the field. Here, the application of precision farming and variable rate technology approach has been proposed as a mean to optimize organic amendment inputs in croplands. Automatic application of organic inputs can be a viable way to increase farm efficiency, productivity and finally profitability.

Purpose of the Technology: Following the natural heterogeneity of the field, precision farming and variable rate technology are here applied as a SLM practice to increase the soil organic carbon (SOC), reduce losses of diffuse polllutants while increasing yield production.

Establishment / maintenance activities and inputs: Precision farming is already a feasible and useful technology in terms of automation, data process and management. In this context, site-specific application of mineral nitrogen is one of the most promising techniques to reduce the environmental impacts of nitrogen pollution. In the same way, variable-rate input of organic amendments (manure, slurry, compost etc.) can be useful for increasing the soil fertility. Spatial information of field characteristics can be overlapped with on-the-go sensors information in the field in order to provide the right dose of biosolid input.

Natural / human environment: High efficient organic application systems will provide both environmental and agronomical benefits. Nutrient management will be optimized and the loss in the groundwater will be reduced. Moreover the soil fertility will be improved by the site-specific application of organic matter, providing the best comnbination between organic inputs, nutrient requirements and reduction of nutrient losses.

Location

Location: Veneto region, Italy

No. of Technology sites analysed:

Geo-reference of selected sites
  • 11.69031, 45.76664

Spread of the Technology:

In a permanently protected area?:

Date of implementation:

Type of introduction

Classification of the Technology

Main purpose
  • improve production
  • reduce, prevent, restore land degradation
  • conserve ecosystem
  • protect a watershed/ downstream areas – in combination with other Technologies
  • preserve/ improve biodiversity
  • reduce risk of disasters
  • adapt to climate change/ extremes and its impacts
  • mitigate climate change and its impacts
  • create beneficial economic impact
  • create beneficial social impact
Land use

  • Cropland
    • Annual cropping
    Number of growing seasons per year: 1

Water supply
  • rainfed
  • mixed rainfed-irrigated
  • full irrigation

Purpose related to land degradation
  • prevent land degradation
  • reduce land degradation
  • restore/ rehabilitate severely degraded land
  • adapt to land degradation
  • not applicable
Degradation addressed
  • chemical soil deterioration - Cn: fertility decline and reduced organic matter content (not caused by erosion)
  • water degradation - Hp: decline of surface water quality
SLM group
  • integrated soil fertility management
  • precision farming and variable rate application technology
SLM measures
  • agronomic measures - A2: Organic matter/ soil fertility
  • management measures - M2: Change of management/ intensity level

Technical drawing

Technical specifications
Application of manure is based on site-specific management units as defined by previously field variability.

Location: Veneto region. Italy

Technical knowledge required for field staff / advisors: high
Technical knowledge required for land users: moderate
Main technical functions: increase in organic matter, improvement of water quality, buffering / filtering water
Secondary technical functions: increase in nutrient availability (supply, recycling,…)

Change of land use practices / intensity level: Organic amendments are distributed in variable rate following the spatial and temporal variability and requirements of the field
Author: Francesco Morari, DAFNAE - University of Padova

Establishment and maintenance: activities, inputs and costs

Calculation of inputs and costs
  • Costs are calculated:
  • Currency used for cost calculation:
  • Exchange rate (to USD): 1 USD = 0.8 €
  • Average wage cost of hired labour per day: 21.00
Most important factors affecting the costs
Machinery and technological devices
Establishment activities
  1. Purchase of equipment for technology application (GPS, sensors etc.) (Timing/ frequency: Once)
Establishment inputs and costs
Specify input Unit Quantity Costs per Unit (€) Total costs per input (€) % of costs borne by land users
Labour
Purchase of equipment for technology application (GPS, sensors etc.)
Equipment
GPS, sensors etc. 1.0 10000.0 10000.0 100.0
Other
Training costs
Total costs for establishment of the Technology 10'000.0
Total costs for establishment of the Technology in USD 12'500.0
Maintenance activities
n.a.

Natural environment

Average annual rainfall
  • < 250 mm
  • 251-500 mm
  • 501-750 mm
  • 751-1,000 mm
  • 1,001-1,500 mm
  • 1,501-2,000 mm
  • 2,001-3,000 mm
  • 3,001-4,000 mm
  • > 4,000 mm
Agro-climatic zone
  • humid
  • sub-humid
  • semi-arid
  • arid
Specifications on climate
Thermal climate class: temperate
Slope
  • flat (0-2%)
  • gentle (3-5%)
  • moderate (6-10%)
  • rolling (11-15%)
  • hilly (16-30%)
  • steep (31-60%)
  • very steep (>60%)
Landforms
  • plateau/plains
  • ridges
  • mountain slopes
  • hill slopes
  • footslopes
  • valley floors
Altitude
  • 0-100 m a.s.l.
  • 101-500 m a.s.l.
  • 501-1,000 m a.s.l.
  • 1,001-1,500 m a.s.l.
  • 1,501-2,000 m a.s.l.
  • 2,001-2,500 m a.s.l.
  • 2,501-3,000 m a.s.l.
  • 3,001-4,000 m a.s.l.
  • > 4,000 m a.s.l.
Technology is applied in
  • convex situations
  • concave situations
  • not relevant
Soil depth
  • very shallow (0-20 cm)
  • shallow (21-50 cm)
  • moderately deep (51-80 cm)
  • deep (81-120 cm)
  • very deep (> 120 cm)
Soil texture (topsoil)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Soil texture (> 20 cm below surface)
  • coarse/ light (sandy)
  • medium (loamy, silty)
  • fine/ heavy (clay)
Topsoil organic matter content
  • high (>3%)
  • medium (1-3%)
  • low (<1%)
Groundwater table
  • on surface
  • < 5 m
  • 5-50 m
  • > 50 m
Availability of surface water
  • excess
  • good
  • medium
  • poor/ none
Water quality (untreated)
  • good drinking water
  • poor drinking water (treatment required)
  • for agricultural use only (irrigation)
  • unusable
Water quality refers to:
Is salinity a problem?
  • Ja
  • Nee

Occurrence of flooding
  • Ja
  • Nee
Species diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low
Habitat diversity
  • high
  • medium
  • low

Characteristics of land users applying the Technology

Market orientation
  • subsistence (self-supply)
  • mixed (subsistence/ commercial)
  • commercial/ market
Off-farm income
  • less than 10% of all income
  • 10-50% of all income
  • > 50% of all income
Relative level of wealth
  • very poor
  • poor
  • average
  • rich
  • very rich
Level of mechanization
  • manual work
  • animal traction
  • mechanized/ motorized
Sedentary or nomadic
  • Sedentary
  • Semi-nomadic
  • Nomadic
Individuals or groups
  • individual/ household
  • groups/ community
  • cooperative
  • employee (company, government)
Gender
  • women
  • men
Age
  • children
  • youth
  • middle-aged
  • elderly
Area used per household
  • < 0.5 ha
  • 0.5-1 ha
  • 1-2 ha
  • 2-5 ha
  • 5-15 ha
  • 15-50 ha
  • 50-100 ha
  • 100-500 ha
  • 500-1,000 ha
  • 1,000-10,000 ha
  • > 10,000 ha
Scale
  • small-scale
  • medium-scale
  • large-scale
Land ownership
  • state
  • company
  • communal/ village
  • group
  • individual, not titled
  • individual, titled
Land use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Water use rights
  • open access (unorganized)
  • communal (organized)
  • leased
  • individual
Access to services and infrastructure
health

poor
good
education

poor
good
technical assistance

poor
good
employment (e.g. off-farm)

poor
good
markets

poor
good
energy

poor
good
roads and transport

poor
good
drinking water and sanitation

poor
good
financial services

poor
good

Impacts

Socio-economic impacts
Crop production
decreased
increased

water availability for livestock
decreased
increased

water quality for livestock
decreased
increased

Socio-cultural impacts
Improved livelihoods and human well-being
decreased
increased

Ecological impacts
water quality
decreased
increased

nutrient cycling/ recharge
decreased
increased

soil organic matter/ below ground C
decreased
increased

emission of carbon and greenhouse gases
increased
decreased

Off-site impacts
groundwater/ river pollution
increased
reduced

Cost-benefit analysis

Benefits compared with establishment costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Benefits compared with maintenance costs
Short-term returns
very negative
very positive

Long-term returns
very negative
very positive

Climate change

Gradual climate change
annual temperature increase

not well at all
very well
Answer: not known
Climate-related extremes (disasters)
local rainstorm

not well at all
very well
Answer: not known
Other climate-related consequences
reduced growing period

not well at all
very well
Answer: not known

Adoption and adaptation

Percentage of land users in the area who have adopted the Technology
  • single cases/ experimental
  • 1-10%
  • 11-50%
  • > 50%
Of all those who have adopted the Technology, how many have done so without receiving material incentives?
  • 0-10%
  • 11-50%
  • 51-90%
  • 91-100%
Has the Technology been modified recently to adapt to changing conditions?
  • Ja
  • Nee
To which changing conditions?
  • climatic change/ extremes
  • changing markets
  • labour availability (e.g. due to migration)

Conclusions and lessons learnt

Strengths: land user's view
Strengths: compiler’s or other key resource person’s view
  • Soil spatial variability is taken into account
  • Reduces diffuse water pollution
  • Optimizes soil organic matter needs
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: land user's viewhow to overcome
Weaknesses/ disadvantages/ risks: compiler’s or other key resource person’s viewhow to overcome
  • High intial costs training
  • High expertise for technology use

References

Compiler
  • Nicola Dal Ferro
Editors
Reviewer
  • Valentin Zuercher
  • Fabian Ottiger
  • Alexandra Gavilano
Date of documentation: April 24, 2015
Last update: April 16, 2019
Resource persons
Full description in the WOCAT database
Linked SLM data
Documentation was faciliated by
Institution Project
Key references
  • Moshia et al., 2015. Precision Manure Management on Site-specific Management Zones: Nitrogen Mineralization. Journal of Plant Nutrition 39 (1).: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2015.1009547
This work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareaAlike 4.0 International