Center for Biodiversity Outcomes, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona.
The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia.
Glob Chang Biol. 2019 Mar;25(3):1152-1170. doi: 10.1111/gcb.14535. Epub 2019 Jan 2.
Interest in land application of organic amendments-such as biosolids, composts, and manures-is growing due to their potential to increase soil carbon and help mitigate climate change, as well as to support soil health and regenerative agriculture. While organic amendments are predominantly applied to croplands, their application is increasingly proposed on relatively arid rangelands that do not typically receive fertilizers or other inputs, creating unique concerns for outcomes such as native plant diversity and water quality. To maximize environmental benefits and minimize potential harms, we must understand how soil, water, and plant communities respond to particular amendments and site conditions. We conducted a global meta-analysis of 92 studies in which organic amendments had been added to arid, semiarid, or Mediterranean rangelands. We found that organic amendments, on average, provide some environmental benefits (increased soil carbon, soil water holding capacity, aboveground net primary productivity, and plant tissue nitrogen; decreased runoff quantity), as well as some environmental harms (increased concentrations of soil lead, runoff nitrate, and runoff phosphorus; increased soil CO emissions). Published data were inadequate to fully assess impacts to native plant communities. In our models, adding higher amounts of amendment benefitted four outcomes and harmed two outcomes, whereas adding amendments with higher nitrogen concentrations benefitted two outcomes and harmed four outcomes. This suggests that trade-offs among outcomes are inevitable; however, applying low-N amendments was consistent with both maximizing benefits and minimizing harms. Short study time frames (median 1-2 years), limited geographic scope, and, for some outcomes, few published studies limit longer-term inferences from these models. Nevertheless, they provide a starting point to develop site-specific amendment application strategies aimed toward realizing the potential of this practice to contribute to climate change mitigation while minimizing negative impacts on other environmental goals.
由于有机肥料(如生物固体、堆肥和粪肥)具有增加土壤碳并有助于缓解气候变化、支持土壤健康和再生农业的潜力,因此人们对其在土地上的应用越来越感兴趣。虽然有机肥料主要应用于农田,但它们在相对干旱的牧场的应用越来越多,这些牧场通常不接受肥料或其他投入,这给原生植物多样性和水质等结果带来了独特的关注。为了最大限度地提高环境效益并最大限度地减少潜在危害,我们必须了解土壤、水和植物群落对特定肥料和场地条件的反应。我们对 92 项在干旱、半干旱或地中海牧场添加有机肥料的研究进行了全球荟萃分析。我们发现,有机肥料平均提供了一些环境效益(增加土壤碳、土壤持水能力、地上净初级生产力和植物组织氮;减少径流量),以及一些环境危害(增加土壤铅、径流水硝酸盐和径流水磷浓度;增加土壤 CO 排放量)。发表的数据不足以充分评估对原生植物群落的影响。在我们的模型中,添加较高量的肥料有益于四个结果,而有害两个结果,而添加较高氮浓度的肥料有益于两个结果,而有害四个结果。这表明结果之间的权衡是不可避免的;然而,应用低氮肥料既符合最大限度地提高效益又最大限度地减少危害。研究时间框架较短(中位数为 1-2 年)、地理范围有限,以及对于某些结果,发表的研究较少,这些都限制了从这些模型中得出更长期的推断。然而,它们为制定特定地点的肥料应用策略提供了一个起点,旨在实现这种做法的潜力,为缓解气候变化做出贡献,同时最大限度地减少对其他环境目标的负面影响。