Four different pelleted organic fertilizer formulations, made by composting swine manure solid fraction (SMSF) both by itself and with sawdust (SMSF-SD), wooden chips (SMSF-WC) and wheat straw (SMSF-WS) were tested to highlight differences in physical, chemical and distribution features in comparison with two pelleted organic fertilizers ordinarily available at retailers (namely, "Mixed Manure" and "Chicken Manure"). Spreading trials were carried out by means of one rotating spreader on one perfectly plan and paved area. Results show that, as far as physical and chemical features are concerned, the greatest difference from the used references is found in pellet size distribution after spreading since the disintegrating action of the rotating spreader does not affect the tested formulation with the same intensity of the commercial products. Distribution tests showed that SMSF-SD, was the formulation with the better longitudinal and transverse distribution while SMSF was the one showing good transverse but poor longitudinal distribution.
Handling, treatment and spreading of pelletted agricultural wastes for organic fertilization
2012
Abstract
Four different pelleted organic fertilizer formulations, made by composting swine manure solid fraction (SMSF) both by itself and with sawdust (SMSF-SD), wooden chips (SMSF-WC) and wheat straw (SMSF-WS) were tested to highlight differences in physical, chemical and distribution features in comparison with two pelleted organic fertilizers ordinarily available at retailers (namely, "Mixed Manure" and "Chicken Manure"). Spreading trials were carried out by means of one rotating spreader on one perfectly plan and paved area. Results show that, as far as physical and chemical features are concerned, the greatest difference from the used references is found in pellet size distribution after spreading since the disintegrating action of the rotating spreader does not affect the tested formulation with the same intensity of the commercial products. Distribution tests showed that SMSF-SD, was the formulation with the better longitudinal and transverse distribution while SMSF was the one showing good transverse but poor longitudinal distribution.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.