Evaluation of electrochemically precipitated struvite as a fertilizer‐phosphorus source in flood‐irrigated rice

Abstract

Phosphorus (P) is a major contaminant in many wastewater sources and has gained interest due to the role P has in eutrophication of receiving waters. Recycling P from wastewater as the mineral struvite (MgNH 4 PO 4 • 6H 2 O) could be a promising option to reduce P discharge into receiving waters and could potentially provide an alternative fertilizer-P source for crop production. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of two struvite materials (i.e., electrochemically precipitated struvite [ECST] and chemically precipitated struvite [CPST]) relative to several other common fertilizer-P sources (i.e., triple super phosphate [TSP], monoammonium phosphate [MAP], diammonium phosphate [DAP], and rock phosphate [RP]) on the response of a pureline rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivar grown under flood-irrigation in a P-deficient, silt-loam soil (Typic Glossaqualfs) in eastern Arkansas. In 2019, rice grain yield did not differ (P > .05) among fertilizer-P sources, whereas in 2020, rice grain yield was greater from TSP (13.1 Mg ha −1 ) than that from ESCT (11.0 Mg ha −1 ) or CPST (12.7 Mg ha −1 ). Rice aboveground dry matter, aboveground and belowground tissue and grain P and N concentrations, aboveground and grain tissue P uptake, and aboveground tissue N concentration from ECST and CPST did not differ (P > .05) from those from TSP, MAP, DAP, RP, or an unamended control. The similarities in rice responses compared with other commonly used, commercially available fertilizer-P sources suggest that struvite materials have the potential to be an alternative fertilizer-P source option for flood-irrigated rice production.

Wastewater‐recycled struvite as a phosphorus source in a wheat–soybean double‐crop production system in eastern Arkansas

“…Collectively, and similar to conclusions from Omidire et al. (2021) in rice, results showed that CPST had no substantial negative effects on soybean growth and productivity compared with TSP, thus supporting CPST as a potential alternative fertilizer‐P option for large‐scale soybean production in a wheat–soybean double‐crop system.…”

“…Similar plant growth or tissue-P uptake characteristics have been reported in many studies comparing struvite to other common fertilizer-P sources (Ghosh et al, 1996;Gonzalez-Ponce et al, 2009;Johnston & Richards, 2003;Li & Zhao, 2003;Kern et al, 2008;Massey et al, 2009;Omidire et al, 2021;Thompson, 2013). In contrast to the reported similarities, other studies have shown reduced plant response with…”

“…Results from the current study agreed with reports from Gell et al (2011) that struvite application could be a source of Mg in crop production. Furthermore, similar to soybean and rice (Omidire et al, 2021), collective results showed that CPST had no substantial negative effects on wheat growth and productivity compared with TSP, thus supporting CPST as a potential fertilizer-P option for large-scale wheat production in a wheat-soybean doublecrop system.…”

“…Although Omidire et al (2021) recently evaluated CPST and TSP effects on annual flood-irrigated rice growth in a silt-loam soil in eastern Arkansas and measured similar plant properties, the current study was conducted on a different soil, at a different location, with different crops, and using different water management practices. Consequently, the current study represents unique and novel field research compared with the recent research in rice reported in Omidire et al (2021).…”

“…Omidire et al. (2021) recently investigated the effects of MAP, DAP, TSP, RP, and two struvite sources (i.e., a chemically precipitated struvite [CPST] and electrochemically precipitated struvite) on annual rice ( Oryza sativa L.) growth and productivity on a silt‐loam soil (Typic Glossaqualfs) in eastern Arkansas and reported numerous similarities in rice properties between the struvite materials and the other commonly used fertilizer‐P sources.…”