Ammonia emission from grassland and livestock production systems in the UK

Ryden, J. C.; Whitehead, David; Lockyer, D. R.; Thompson, R.B.; Skinner, J.H.; Garwood, E. A.

doi:10.1016/0269-7491(87)90032-7

Cited by 89 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The Period 1 and 2 emission estimates were derived from very different experimental conditions (particularly wetness and grazing density); therefore, we may not combine the two periods into a single emission factor. Previous experiments have measured NH 3 emissions from cattle urine patches at ratios of 7-25.7 % of excreted urine-N to grazed pastures (Jarvis et al, 1989;Ryden et al, 1987;Laubach et al, 2012Laubach et al, , 2013a. Our estimates for emissions from grazing are towards the lower end of the range of published emission factors.…”

Section: Emission Factors From the Grazing Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…It has been estimated that 75-90 % of the N ingested by a grazing cow is metabolised inefficiently and returned by excreta to the grazing paddocks, of which over 70 % is returned as urine (Whitehead, 1995;Zaman et al, 2009). NH 3 emissions have been measured from cattle urine patches at the ratio of 7-25.7 % of excreted urine nitrogen (N) for grazed pastures (Jarvis et al, 1989;Ryden et al, 1987;Laubach et al, 2012Laubach et al, , 2013a, and measurements from sheep urine patches in summer-winter experiments have suggested emissions which represent 12.2-22.2 % of excreted urine-N (Sherlock and Goh, 1984).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ammonia emissions from a grazed field estimated by miniDOAS measurements and inverse dispersion modelling

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Ammonia (NH 3 ) fluxes were estimated from a field being grazed by dairy cattle during spring by applying a backward Lagrangian stochastic model (bLS) model combined with horizontal concentration gradients measured across the field. Continuous concentration measurements at field boundaries were made by open-path miniDOAS (differential optical absorption spectroscopy) instruments while the cattle were present and for 6 subsequent days. The deposition of emitted NH 3 to "clean" patches on the field was also simulated, allowing both "net" and "gross" emission estimates, where the dry deposition velocity (v d ) was predicted by a canopy resistance (R c ) model developed from local NH 3 flux and meteorological measurements. Estimated emissions peaked during grazing and decreased after the cattle had left the field, while control on emissions was observed from covariance with temperature, wind speed and humidity and wetness measurements made on the field, revealing a diurnal emission profile. Large concentration differences were observed between downwind receptors, due to spatially heterogeneous emission patterns. This was likely caused by uneven cattle distribution and a low grazing density, where "hotspots" of emissions would arise as the cattle grouped in certain areas, such as around the water trough. The spatial complexity was accounted for by separating the model source area into sub-sections and optimising individual source area coefficients to measured concentrations. The background concentration was the greatest source of uncertainty, and based on a sensitivity/uncertainty analysis the overall uncertainty associated with derived emission factors from this study is at least 30-40 %.Emission factors can be expressed as 6 ± 2 g NH 3 cow −1 day −1 , or 9 ± 3 % of excreted urine-N emitted as NH 3 , when deposition is not simulated and 7 ± 2 g NH 3 cow −1 day −1 , or 10 ± 3 % of excreted urine-N emitted as NH 3 , when deposition is included in the gross emission model. The results suggest that around 14 ± 4 % of emitted NH 3 was deposited to patches within the field that were not affected by urine or dung.

show abstract

Section: Emission Factors From the Grazing Experimentsmentioning

confidence: 72%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ammonia emissions from a grazed field estimated by miniDOAS measurements and inverse dispersion modelling

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This issue warrants future studies to quantify the amount and chemical entity of N lost from these systems. However, observed losses of urinary N as ammonia N when applied to pasture and ammonia N losses from manure slurries that were applied to cropland have been between 4 to 50% (Ryden et al, 1987;Jarvis et al, 1989;Lockyer and Whitehead, 1990). Additionally, Stewart (1970) observed a 25 to 90% loss of urinary N as ammonia N when applied to soil columns, whereas Kellems et al (1979) observed a 95% loss of urinary N as ammonia N from cattle manure slurries that did not use soil.…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

The influence of oscillating dietary protein concentrations on finishing cattle. II. Nutrient retention and ammonia emissions

Archibeque¹,

Freetly²,

Cole³

et al. 2007

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:We hypothesized that oscillation of the dietary CP concentrations would improve efficiency of N use and reduce N loss to the environment. Charolaiscross steers (n = 8; 315 ± 21 kg of BW) were used in a replicated 4 × 4 Latin square design. The steers were allowed ad libitum access to the following diets: 1) 9.1% CP (low), 2) 11.8% CP (medium), 3) 13.9% CP (high), or 4) low and high oscillated on a 48-h interval on each diet (oscillating). Dry matter intake did not differ among treatments (P = 0.46), but N intake differed (P < 0.01) from 94 (low) to 131 (medium), 142 (high), and 133 g/d (oscillating), as designed. Dry matter digestibility increased (P < 0.01) from 71.8% (low) to 75.8% (medium), 77.7% (high), and 77.5% (oscillating). Nitrogen digestibility increased (P < 0.01) from 62.2% (low) to 67.2% (medium) to 70.1% (high) and 70.9% (oscillating). Nitrogen retention was greater (P < 0.01) in steers fed oscillating (55.0 g/d) than in the steers fed low (34.8 g/ d) or high (40.2 g/d), but N retention of steers fed medium (49.8 g/d) differed (P = 0.02) only from that of

show abstract

“…In principle temperature should increase NH 3 emission related to grazing animals or outdoor yards used by livestock, however, clear temperature responses have not always been seen in practice (Misselbrook et al, 2001). However studies suggest that emissions from the urine fraction are larger during summer than during autumn (Ryden et al, 1987).…”

Section: Grazing Animalsmentioning

confidence: 96%