HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Harmel, R. D. Articles by Patterson, M. C. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Harmel, R. D. Articles by Patterson, M. C.

On-Farm Agro-Economic Effects of Fertilizing Cropland with Poultry Litter

R. Daren Harmel^*,1, B. Harmel and M. C. Patterson

^* USDA-Agricultural Research Service, 808 E. Blackland Rd., Temple, TX 76502; and Midwestern State University, Wichita Falls, TX 76308

¹ Corresponding author: daren.harmel{at}ars.usda.gov

The profitability of using poultry litter as a fertilizer and soil amendment in cultivated agriculture was evaluated with the hopes of determining an economically optimal fertilization strategy. The traditional commercial (inorganic) fertilizer practice was compared with several hybrid litter and commercial N fertilization alternatives in terms of on-farm agro-economic effects. Six years of land management, crop yield, crop price, and fertilizer cost data were collected from 6 field sites in central Texas and utilized for economic analysis. Varying litter and inorganic fertilizer combinations resulted in minimal differences in corn and wheat yields; however, total fertilizer costs increased significantly as litter application rate increased (and commercial fertilizer rate decreased) in spite of dramatic cost increases for commercial fertilizer. The greatest average annual profits were determined to occur at the 1 and 2 tons/acre (ac) litter rates with 7 to 14% profit reductions for the commercial fertilizer-only treatment and the 3 tons/ac litter treatment. At litter rates greater than 3 tons/ac, diminishing returns were observed as fertilizer costs increased with no compensating greater yields to provide offsetting revenues. It is important to note that this economically optimal annual litter rate of 1 to 2 tons/ac is also environmentally optimal according to nutrient runoff and soil nutrient data collected on-site. These results provide the scientific basis to support the use of litter as a cost-effective, environmentally friendly fertilizer alternative in this and similar regions.

Key Words: by-product utilization • profitability • environmental sustainability • water quality