Deanna Osmond

Phosphorus indices: why we need to take stock of how we are doing.

Many states have invested significant resources to identify components of their Phosphorus (P) Index that reliably estimate the relative risk of P loss and incentivize conservation management. However, differences in management recommendations and manure application guidelines for similar field conditions among state P Indices, coupled with minimal reductions in the extent of P-impaired surface waters and soil test P (STP) levels, led the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) to revise the 590 Nutrient Management Standard. In preparation for this revision, NRCS requested that a review of the scientific underpinnings and accuracy of current P Indices be undertaken. They also sought to standardize the interpretation and management implications of P Indices, including establishment of ratings above which P applications should be curtailed. Although some states have initiated STP thresholds above which no application of P is allowed, STP alone cannot define a sites risk of P loss. Phosphorus Indices are intended to account for all of the major factors leading to P loss. A rigorous evaluation of P Indices is needed to determine if they are directionally and magnitudinally correct. Although use of observed P loss data under various management scenarios is ideal, such data are spatially and temporally limited. Alternatively, the use of a locally validated water quality model that has been shown to provide accurate estimates of P loss may be the most expedient option to conduct Index assessments in the short time required by the newly revised 590 Standard.

Improving conservation practices programming to protect water quality in agricultural watersheds: Lessons learned from the National Institute of Food and Agriculture-Conservation Effects Assessment Project

Nutrient enrichment and sedimentation of water resources is a significant problem in the United States and globally (Carpenter et al. 2011; Dubrovsky et al. 2010; Hilton et al. 2006). Specifically, in the United States, over 6,908 water bodies are listed as being nutrient impaired and 6,165 are sediment impaired (USEPA 2012). Agricultural nonpoint source pollution contributes, in part, to impaired water resources in many of these watersheds (NRC 2008; USEPA 2010). Conservation practices, including conservation tillage, nutrient management, and riparian buffers, are routinely used to reduce off-site losses of sediment, nutrients, pesticides, and bacteria from agricultural operations. Many research studies, generally conducted at the plot- or field-scale, report ranges in effectiveness of such conservation practices, from being negative to 100% effective (Gagnon et al. 2004; Gagnon et al. 2008; Jokela et al. 2004; Line et al. 2001; Richards and Baker 2002; Schnepf and Cox 2006; Sharpley et al. 2006; Shepard 2005; Smith et al. 2006). Documentation of combined practice impacts on water quality at the watershed scale has been more difficult than in plot or field-scale studies. The Black Creek Project in northeastern Indiana and the Model Implementation Program (MIP) promoted by the USDA and US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)…

The role of interface organizations in science communication and understanding

“Interface” organizations are groups created to foster the use of science in environmental policy, management, and education. Here we compare interface organizations that differ in spatial scale, modes of operation, and intended audience to illustrate their diversity and importance in promoting the application of science to environmental issues. There has been exciting recent growth in the nature and extent of activities by interface organizations and in new methods for science communication and engagement. These developments can help scientists – who face personal and institutional challenges when attempting to convey the results of their research to various audiences – interact with society on specific issues in specific places, and with a wide range of non-traditional audiences. The ongoing mission for these organizations should be to move beyond simply increasing awareness of environmental problems to the creation of solutions that result in genuine environmental improvements.

Farmers’ Use of Nutrient Management: Lessons from Watershed Case Studies

Nutrient enrichment of water resources has degraded coastal waters throughout the world, including in the United States (e.g., Chesapeake Bay, Gulf of Mexico, and Neuse Estuary). Agricultural nonpoint sources have significant impacts on water resources. As a result, nutrient management planning is the primary tool recommended to reduce nutrient losses from agricultural fields. Its effectiveness requires nutrient management plans be used by farmers. There is little literature describing nutrient management decision-making. Here, two case studies are described that address this gap: (i) a synthesis of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, the Conservation Effects Assessment Project, and (ii) field surveys from three nutrient-impaired river basins/watersheds in North Carolina (Neuse, Tar-Pamlico, and Jordan Lake drainage areas). Results indicate farmers generally did not fully apply nutrient management plans or follow basic soil test recommendations even when they had them. Farmers were found to be hesitant to apply N at university-recommended rates because they did not trust the recommendations, viewed abundant N as insurance, or used recommendations made by fertilizer dealers. Exceptions were noted when watershed education, technical support, and funding resources focused on nutrient management that included easing management demands, actively and consistently working directly with a small group of farmers, and providing significant resource allocations to fund agency personnel and cost-share funds to farmers. Without better dialogue with farmers and meaningful investment in strategies that reward farmers for taking what they perceive as risks relative to nutrient reduction, little progress in true adoption of nutrient management will be made.

In-Season Optimization and Site-Specific Nitrogen Management for Soft Red Winter Wheat

application up to 70% without a reduction in grain yield compared to a grower’s practice. Site-specific N management based on an in-season assessment of Stone et al. (1996) used an on-the-go sensor measurcrop N status may offer producers increased grain yield, profitability, ing plant N spectral index to create submeter siteand spring N fertilizer use efficiency (SNUE). The goal of this study specific N management units based on an estimate of was to determine the distinct contributions of (i) in-season N rate optimization and (ii) site-specific N management. Our objective was in-season crop N status in wheat. This site-specific N to compare site-specific and field-specific N management with typical management system reduced N fertilizer by 32 and 57 growers’ practices to determine if site-specific N management (i) kg N ha 1 at two of three sites without a reduction in increased soft red winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) grain yield, grain yield compared with a typical grower’s practice. (ii) reduced N inputs, (iii) increased SNUE, and (iv) reduced withinThey also reported that the site-specific N application field grain yield variability. Research was conducted at eight sites in reduced spatial variation in wheat forage and grain yield 2000, 2001, and 2002. A randomized complete block design with two compared with the grower’s practice. or five N management systems was used at two and six sites, respecSimilarly, Raun et al. (2002) used a multispectral optitively. Site-specific management did not improve grain yield compared cal sensor to create 1-m2 site-specific N management with field-specific management when based on the same in-season units in wheat. A N fertilizer optimization algorithm estimation of optimum N rates. At sites where site-specific or field(NFOA) that estimates in-season crop N status and specific systems were compared with typical growers’ practices, grain potential grain yield was used to adjust N rates. They yield benefits of in-season N optimization (up to 2267 kg ha 1) were reported that by using NFOA, it might be possible to apparent. For grain yield, in-season optimization of N rate was more important than site-specific management. A large reduction in N inset more efficient and profitable fertilization levels and puts (up to 48.6%) was also attributed to in-season N rate optimizaincrease N use efficiency compared with typical growtion. After incorporating in-season optimization, a further reduction ers’ practices. in N inputs (up to 19.6%) was possible through site-specific applicaMulla et al. (1992), Bhatti et al. (1998), Stone et al. tion. Site-specific N application maximized SNUE compared with (1996), and Raun et al. (2002) compared site-specific N either field-specific or typical growers’ practices at all sites and reduced management based on either a preor in-season estiwithin-field grain yield variance at four sites. mate of the crop’s N requirement to a typical grower’s practice. Consequently, the reduction in N rates compared with growers’ practices might not have been the S N management is the adjusting of withinresult of site-specific application but could instead be field N fertilizer rates based on spatially variable due to using a preor in-season estimation of the crop’s factors that affect optimum N rate (Sawyer, 1994). This N requirement. practice may offer producers the ability to increase grain In the southeastern USA, Scharf and Alley (1993), yield, profitability, and N fertilizer efficiency by applyAlley et al. (1994), Weisz and Heiniger (2000), and ing N only where required for optimum plant growth. Weisz et al. (2001) developed a field-specific N manageSite-specific management may also be environmentally ment system for soft red winter wheat based on an inbeneficial to producers. season evaluation of the crop’s N requirement (Fig. 1). Mulla et al. (1992) created site-specific management This system first determines the whole-field tiller density units (18.3 m by 564–655 m) based on preseason soil N at Zadoks’ Growth Stage (GS) 25 (Zadoks et al., 1974). (nitrate N and ammonium N) tests and available soil When GS-25 tiller density is below a critical threshold water content. Similarly, Bhatti et al. (1998) created (540 tillers m 2), a GS-25 N application is made to insite-specific N management units based on crop produccrease tiller development (Ayoub, 1974; Power and tivity. In both cases, site-specific N reduced N fertilizer Alessi, 1978; Lutcher and Mahler, 1988; Scharf and Alley, 1993; Weisz et al., 2001). A GS-25 N application can stimulate tiller development in southeastern areas M. Flowers, USDA-ARS, Air Quality–Plant Growth and Dev. Res. because winter wheat does not enter a dormant state Unit, 3908 Inwood Rd., Raleigh, NC 27603; R. Weisz, Dep. of Crop in these southern latitudes. If GS-25 tiller density is Sci., North Carolina State Univ., Box 7620, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620; above the threshold, a GS-25 N application is not necesR. Heiniger, Dep. of Crop Sci, North Carolina State Univ., Vernon James Res. and Ext. Cent., 207 Research Rd., Plymouth, NC 27692; sary. At GS 30, a field-averaged tissue test is used to D. Osmond, Dep. of Soil Sci., North Carolina State Univ., Box 7619, optimize N application rates (Alley et al., 1994). This Raleigh, NC 27695-7619; and C. Crozier, Dep. of Soil Sci., North system resulted in an increase in estimated profit of

Field Evaluation of Four Level Spreader-Vegetative Filter Strips to Improve Urban Storm-Water Quality

73 Carolina State Univ., Vernon James Res. and Ext. Cent., 207 Research ha 1 across 20 site-years (Scharf and Alley, 1993). Rd., Plymouth, NC 27692. Received 5 Dec. 2002. *Corresponding author (mike_flowers@ncsu.edu). While this system (Fig. 1) has been tested and adopted Published in Agron. J. 96:124–134 (2004).  American Society of Agronomy Abbreviations: GS, growth stage; SNUE, spring nitrogen fertilizer use efficiency. 677 S. Segoe Rd., Madison, WI 53711 USA

Comparing phosphorus indices from twelve southern U.S. states against monitored phosphorus loads from six prior southern studies.

An assessment of the performance of four level spreader–vegetative filter strip (LS-VFS) systems designed to treat urban storm-water runoff was undertaken at two sites in the Piedmont of North Carolina. At each site, a 7.6-m grassed filter strip and a 15.2-m half-grassed, half-forested filter strip were examined. Monitored parameters included rainfall, inflow to, and outflow from each LS-VFS system. A total of 21 and 22 flow-proportional water quality samples were collected and analyzed for the Apex and Louisburg sites, respectively. All studied LS-VFS systems significantly reduced mean total suspended solids (TSS) concentrations (p<0.05), with the 7.6 and 15.2-m buffers reducing TSS by at least 51 and 67%, respectively. Both 15.2-m VFSs significantly reduced the concentrations of total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), total nitrogen (TN), organic nitrogen (Org-N), and NH4-N (p<0.05), whereas results were mixed for the 7.6-m VFSs. Significant pollutant mass reduction was observed (p<0.05) for all nine pollutant f...

Nitrogen Release from Coated Urea Fertilizers in Different Soils

Forty-eight states in the United States use phosphorus (P) indices to meet the requirements of their Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Code 590 Standard, which provides national guidance for nutrient management of agricultural lands. The majority of states developed these indices without consultation or coordination with neighboring states to meet specific local conditions and policy needs. Using water quality and land treatment data from six previously published articles, we compared P loads with P-Index values and ratings using the 12 southern P indices. When total measured P loads were regressed with P-Index rating values, moderate to very strong relationships (0.50 to 0.97) existed for five indices (Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina) and all but one index was directionally correct. Regressions with dissolved P were also moderate to very strong ( of 0.55 to 0.95) for the same five state P indices (Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, and South Carolina); directionality of the Alabama Index was negative. When total measured P loads were transformed to current NRCS 590 Standard ratings (Low [<2.2 kg P ha], Moderate, [2.2-5.5 kg P ha], and High [>5.5 kg P ha]) and these ratings were then compared to the southern-Index ratings, many of the P indices correctly identified Low losses (77%), but most did not correctly identify Moderate or High loss situations (14 and 31%, respectively). This study demonstrates that while many of the P indices were directionally correct relative to the measured water quality data, there is a large variability among southern P indices that may result in different P management strategies being employed under similar conditions.

USDA water quality projects and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture Conservation Effects Assessment Project watershed studies

The nitrogen (N) release from coated urea fertilizers (Arborite and ESN), traditional N fertilizers [urea, (NH2)2CO], and urea ammonium nitrate (UAN) [(NH2)2CO, NH4NO3] in three North Carolina (USA) soils was measured throughout a 12-week laboratory incubation. Treatments were N source and moisture level (60% and 80% of field capacity). In both the Candor and Cecil soils, 40% of the Arborite N had released by day 2 after addition to the soil. Maximum Arborite N release was achieved by week 6 for both soils. The ESN N release began between weeks 1 and 2, and maximum release was attained by week 6 for the Candor and by week 8 for the Cecil soil. The ESN reached 70% release on Portsmouth by week 8 and Arborite had an immediate release. Field studies of these coated ureas would be needed to determine if they are economically viable over more traditional N fertilizers in North Carolina.

Effects of Riparian Buffer Vegetation and Width: A 12-Year Longitudinal Study.

The first major federally-funded effort to relate effects of conservation practices to water quality was the Black Creek Project in northeastern Indiana beginning in 1975 (USEPA 1977). From 1978 to 1982, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) conducted the Model Implementation Program (MIP) to demonstrate and study the effects of addressing agricultural nonpoint source problems through Section 208 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (NWQEP and Harbridge House 1983). Building on these early efforts, a much larger USDA- and USEPA-sponsored nonpoint source (NPS) pollution control program, The Rural Clean Water Program (RCWP), began in 1980 as an experiment to combine land treatment and water quality monitoring to document NPS control effectiveness across the country (Gale et al. 1993). The objectives of the RCWP were (1) to achieve improved water quality in the project area in the most cost-effective manner possible in keeping with the provision of adequate supplies of food, fiber, and a quality environment; (2) to assist agricultural landowners and operators in reducing agricultural NPS water pollutants and improving water quality in rural areas to meet water quality standards or water quality goals; and (3) to develop and test programs, policies, and procedures…