Next Article in Journal
Employing Artificial Intelligence for Enhanced Microbial Fuel Cell Performance through Wolf Vitamin Solution Optimization
Previous Article in Journal
Investigation of Juncus and Iris Plant Potential—Two Native Serbian Species for Utilization in Nature-Based Solutions towards Improving the Quality of Water Contaminated with Zinc and Supporting Biodiversity
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 16
Issue 15
10.3390/su16156466
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Organic Fraction Municipal Solid Waste Compost and Horse Bean Green Manure Improve Sustainability of a Top-Quality Tobacco Cropping System: The Beneficial Effects on Soil and Plants

by
Maria Isabella Sifola
1,*,
Eugenio Cozzolino
2,
Daniele Todisco
1,
Mario Palladino
1,
Mariarosaria Sicignano
2 and
Luisa del Piano
2
1
Department of Agricultural Sciences, University of Napoli Federico II, Via Università 100, Portici, 80055 Napoli, Italy
2
Research Center for Cereal and Industrial Crops, Council for Agricultural Research and Economics (CREA), Via Torrino 3, 81100 Caserta, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2024, 16(15), 6466; https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156466 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 28 June 2024 / Revised: 19 July 2024 / Accepted: 23 July 2024 / Published: 28 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Agriculture)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Organic amendment and green manuring are two agricultural practices highly recommended to improve sustainability in agriculture since they show numerous beneficial effects on both soils and crops. The main aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of both, specifically organic fraction municipal solid waste (OFMSW) compost and horse bean (Vicia faba L., cv minor) green manure, combined separately or together with a mineral fertilization using synthetic products and in comparison with a mineral fertilization alone (control), on a top-quality tobacco crop (dark fire-cured Kentucky) grown in the cultivation district of Central Italy (High Tiber Valley, Tuscany region) in 2020 and 2021. The following parameters were measured: (i) leaf emergence rate (LER, leaves day−1); (ii) crop growth rate (CGR, kg dry biomass ha−1 day−1); (iii) root weight density (RWD, mg cm−3); (iv) yield of cured product (CLY, Mg ha−1). Analytical determinations were carried out on soil, sampled at the 0–0.3 m depth (organic matter, %; total N, %; NO3-N, mg kg−1; C/N; P and K, mg kg−1), and on plant biomass (total N, %; NO3-N, kg ha−1). Soil water retention measures were also made. Water productivity (WP, kg cured product m−3 gross crop evapotranspiration, ETc gross), irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE, kg cured product m−3 seasonal irrigation volume) and N agronomic efficiency (NAE, kg cured product kg−1 mineral N applied by synthetic fertilizers) were calculated. Both the applications of OFMSW compost and horse bean green manure increased soil content of organic matter and main nutrients (N, P and K), as well as C/N, when compared with control conditions. There was an increase in soil water content in C conditions over the entire soil matric potential interval (0.04 to 1.2 MPa) with a maximum value at 1.2 MPa in both years. Both practices appeared promising for tobacco cultivation and could help to better address the nitrogen needs of the crop during the season and reduce potential water pollution due to nitrates. Considering the amount of synthetic nitrogen fertilizer saved by using both organic soil amendment and green manuring, there should be fewer potential carbon emissions due to the production, transportation and field application of synthetic nitrogen fertilizers.

1. Introduction

Organic amendment and green manuring are two agricultural practices highly recommended to improve sustainability in agriculture since they show numerous beneficial effects on both soils and crops [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17]. Overall, on soils they can determine the following: (i) increases in organic matter content, stable in the case of compost [1,2,3,4,5] or readily degradable in the case of green manuring [6,7,8,9]; (ii) enrichment in nitrogen (N) and other nutrients (P and K; [1,4,6,7,8,9,10]); (iii) improvements in water retention capacity [4,11,12] and in soil microbial health [1]. Both also promote a good growth (above- and below-ground plant parts; [7,8]), a satisfactory yield of good quality per unit of land area [4,13,14,15]; and a high efficiency of resources (N, water, etc.) use. Finally, green manuring also allows to prevent soil erosion as well as to enhance plant protection (i.e., weeds and parasites; [6,17]). In this latter concern, cover crops may act as obstacles to weed adaptation thanks to the management practices associated with their cropping [7].
Both organic amendment and green manuring may prevent nutrient losses, albeit in different ways. Overall, while organic amendment allows the gradual release of plant nutrients, the cover crops grown for green manuring prevent nutrient loss through the mop-up of excess soil nitrates, thus producing soil N conservation, highly recommended by several regulations around the world (in Europe, the EEC Nitrate Directive of 1991). In addition, green manuring by legumes may also influence N fixation, with differences frequently due to type of legume used and the involved bacteria [7]. Therefore, both practices positively face agronomic and environmental objectives [2].
Organic amendment and green manuring can minimize the severe impacts of monoculture practice [18,19,20,21]. They showed efficacy for a wide range of crops grown in the field [20,21]. They may also help to face climate change, through an increase in carbon sequestration in the soil and a reduction in percentage CO2 emissions of agricultural origin [22,23,24]. All these beneficial effects, however, fully arise over medium-long periods.
When organic amendment is a compost derived by the organic fraction from municipal solid waste (OFMSW), there is the additional benefit of using a material that would be difficult to dispose of. Horse bean (Vicia faba L., cv. minor) as cover crop is recommended for its good adaptation to (i) different soil types, (ii) both cool or warm seasons and, often, (iii) drought [25]. It gives a great amount of biomass and shows high biological nitrogen fixation, which keep it extremely useful as preceding a crop in a rotation [25]. Due to its good adaptability, it may be sown both in fall and in spring, changing life duration depending on temperature and soil moisture [25].
Tobacco is a cash crop widely cultivated all over the world (3.14 million hectares in 2022; [26]). Overall, it is widespread in Asia (2.02 million hectares), America (0.53 million hectares), Africa (0.52 million hectares) and Europe (0.07 million hectares) [26]. Regardless of different areas, intensive agricultural systems are used for its cultivation with considerable amounts of external resources like fertilizers, water, chemicals for weeds, parasites and sprouting control, labor, etc. [27,28,29]. Monoculture is currently practiced all over the world and, consequently, all hazards due to this system are present in tobacco cropping [30,31].
The main aim of the present study was to evaluate the potential impact of OFMSW compost and horse bean green manure in the cultivation routine of a dark fire-cured Kentucky tobacco crop, grown in the Tuscan cultivation district (Central Italy) where monoculture is the normality (cover cropping and green manure is rarely practiced). Both treatments, separately or together, were combined with a mineral fertilization using synthetic products and further compared with a mineral fertilization alone (control). The effect of the treatments on soil intrinsic quality traits and crop response was investigated from transplanting to commercial harvest/s. We started with the evidence that there were very few studies on the use of both organic amendment [31,32,33,34,35,36,37] and green manuring [38,39,40] on tobacco, and often with contrasting results. Only one concerned the use of OFMSW compost [41], which, nevertheless, did not investigate its effect on chemical characteristics of soils.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Materials, Experimental Treatments and Crop Management

A field experiment on the effect of soil organic amendment with OFMSW compost and horse bean (Vicia faba L., cv. minor) green manuring was conducted over two years (2020 and 2021) at Anghiari (AR, Central Italy; 43°32′30″ N 12°03′18″ E, 429 m above sea level) on dark fire-cured tobacco (Kentucky, Ky), cv. Foiano. In 2020, soil amendments were applied on 22 May only on soil previously green-manured with horse bean, whereas in 2021 the amendments and the green manuring were factorially combined. Treatments were hereafter reported as C (amendment with OFMSW compost), NC (no amendment), GM (horse bean green manuring) and NGM (no green manuring). Soil characteristics at the beginning of the experiment are reported in Table 1.
In both years, OFMSW compost, produced by AISA Impianti S.p.a (San Zeno, 52100 Arezzo, ITALY; https://www.aisaimpianti.it/20072023-ambiente.php; accessed on 19 July 2024) through a controlled process of aerobic fermentation, was applied at a rate of 12.5 Mg ha−1 (10.6 Mg dry weight, d.w., ha−1 in 2020 and 10.4 Mg d.w. ha−1 in 2021). The chemical composition of commercial products is reported in Table 2.
Horse bean was sowed as a cover crop on 25 October 2019 and 15 October 2020, and green manured in about mid-May in both 2020 and 2021. Supplies of about 50 kg ha−1 of mineral N were considered from OFMSW compost, and about the same amount from green manuring, according to the N fertilization plan (NFP; [42]). Both were calculated based on physical and chemical soil characteristics and on soil N balance [43].
Tobacco seedlings were transplanted on 25 and 31 May 2020 and 2021, respectively, at 1.0 m × 1.0 m distance (1 plant per square meter). Leaves from the central part of each plot (30 m2) were harvested, when fully ripe, one time in the first (on 4 September 2020) and two times in the second year (on 27 September and 7 October 2021), and then fresh-weighed, manually put on sticks and finally threaded together to be fire-cured in barns according to the standard procedure [43]. After curing was completed, the yield of cured products (CLY, Mg ha−1) was determined at a standard moisture of 22%.
The plants were regularly sprinkler-irrigated during cropping (eight waterings per year) according to the standard, empirical, management of irrigation practiced in the area. Seasonal volumes of 2584 and 2950 m3 ha−1 were applied in 2020 and 2021, respectively. Pest and disease management, topping and sprouting control were carried out according to the standard practices on site [44].

2.2. N Fertilization Plans

As previously reported, a N fertilization plan [42], which took into account both OFMSW compost and horse bean green manure N supplies, was adopted in both years. Mineral N fertilizer doses using synthetic products were as follows: (i) 160 kg N ha−1 (hereafter reported as full N dose, FND), which is the recommended dose for Ky tobacco in that specific cultivation district (Central Italy), and which was applied to the plots managed without both organic amendments and green manuring; (ii) 100 kg N ha−1 (hereafter reported as reduced N dose, RND), applied in the plots managed with organic amendment but without green manuring, or without amendment but with green manuring; (iii) 50 kg N ha−1 (hereafter indicated as minimum N dose, MND), which was applied to the plots managed with both organic amendment and green manuring. About 40% of the FND was applied at transplanting whereas the remaining amount at side-dressing. Otherwise, 100% of both RND and MND was applied at side-dressing.
Under FND fertilization regime about 150 kg ha−1 P2O5 were applied at transplanting while 80 and 92 kg ha−1 K2O were applied at transplanting and at the beginning of rapid stem elongation, respectively. Under both RND and MND fertilization regimes, no amount of P2O5 was applied. Finally, only in plots without organic amendment but with green manuring (1 out of 2 cases of RND fertilization regime), about 90 kg ha−1 K2O was applied at the beginning of rapid stem elongation.

2.3. Soil and Plant Samplings and Measurements

During the growing seasons, at −11 (before green manuring and both organic amendment and mineral fertilization; 14 May, I sampling), 45 (rosette phase; 9 July, II sampling), 59 (beginning of rapid stem elongation; 23 July, III sampling), 72 (flowering; 6 August, IV sampling), 101 (commercial harvest; 3 September, V sampling) and 148 days after transplanting (DAT; 20 October, VI sampling) in 2020 and at −11 (before green manuring and both organic amendment and mineral fertilization; 20 May, I sampling), 45 (rosette phase; 15 July, II sampling), 59 (beginning of rapid stem elongation; 29 July, III sampling), 73 (flowering; 12 August, IV sampling), 122 (1st commercial harvest; 30 September, V sampling), 142 DAT (second commercial harvest; 20 October, VI sampling) and 163 DAT (12 November, VII sampling) in 2021, soil was sampled at 0–0.3 m depth to determine (i) organic matter (SOM, %), (ii) total nitrogen (%), (iii) NO3-N (mg g−1) and other nutrients (P and K, mg kg−1) and (iv) C/N ratio.
About 1 kg of soil sampled at 45 and 101 DAT in 2020 and at −11 and 99 DAT in 2021 from C and NC plots under green manuring condition was prepared for water retention measurements. The experimental analysis was conducted using pressure plate apparatus [45]. Six working reference pressures were chosen (0.04, 0.08, 0.15, 0.3, 0.6 and 1.2 MPa) to cover the matric potential domain from field capacity to near wilting point. For each reference pressure, three replicates were completed per soil sample analyzed.
Root weight density (RWD, mg cm−3) was measured on soil samples, collected at 45, 59, 72 and 101 in 2020, and at 45, 73, 122 and 142 in 2021, according to Amato and Pardo [46]. In brief, 100 g of soil were washed with a 5% w:w solution of hexametaphosphate (85%; Carlo Erba Reagents S.A.S., BP 616 F-27106, Val de Reuil Cedex, France) and sodium bicarbonate (15%; Chem-Lab NV, Industriezone “De Arend” 2, B 8210, Zedelgem, Belgium) at 10% w/w dilution, then weighted and sieved using a 0.2 mm square-meshed sieve. Non root material was eliminated manually. Roots were placed in an oven (WTC Binder, 78532, Tuttlingen, Germany) at 70 °C until constant weight. The RWD was calculated multiplying the root weight (g g−1 soil) to the soil bulk density (g cm−3). RWD results are reported as mg cm−3.
For growth analysis, at 45, 59 and 72 DAT in 2020 and at 45, 59, 73 and 99 DAT in 2021, two plants per plot were sampled to measure (i) above-ground dry biomass after oven-drying at 60 °C until constant weight and (ii) n. leaves per plant. The following descriptive variables of growth were then calculated: (i) leaf emergence rate (LER, n. leaves day −1); (ii) crop growth rate (CGR, kg dry biomass ha−1 day−1). The above ground dry biomass was finally prepared for analytical determinations of total and nitric N.
The agronomic water use efficiency, as water productivity (WP, kg of cured product m−3 crop gross evapotranspiration, gross ETc) and as irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE, kg of cured product m−3 irrigation water), was then calculated [47]. In addition, the agronomic N use efficiency (NAE, kg of cured product kg−1 N applied as mineral fertilizer) was also determined.

2.4. Analytical Determination on Soil and Plant Biomass

Total N content of soil and plant biomass was determined by Kjeldahl method as previously reported [48]. Soil and plant content of NO3-N was determined using the Foss FIAstar 5000 continuous flow Analyzer (FOSS Analytical, DK-3400 Hilleroed, Denmark). Soil P and K and organic matter was obtained using Olsen method, Tetraphenylborate method and Bichromate method, respectively [41].

2.5. Weather Conditions

Rainfall and minimum and maximum air temperature over the entire experimental periods (May–November in both years) are reported in Figure 1. During the growing seasons (May–September), 10-day means of maximum temperature were higher than 30 °C in one out of three 10-day intervals in July and August in 2020, whereas they were higher in two out of three 10-day intervals in June, July and August in 2021. In the same experimental periods, rainfall was 290 mm in 2020 and 83 mm in 2021. In 2020, there was a hailstorm at beginning of August which compromised commercial yield extent.

2.6. Experimental Design and Statistical Analyses

In 2020, organic amendment treatment was arranged in a completely randomized block design with elemental plots of 520 m2. Otherwise, in 2021 organic amendment and green manuring were arranged in a split-plot design, with organic amendment treatment as the main plot and green manuring treatment as the sub-plot (260 m2). In both years, treatments were replicated three times.
All results were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) using the MSTAT-C software, version 1.4 [49], and means were separated by least significant difference.

3. Results

Soil organic matter was higher in the plots C than in plots NC (Figure 2). Differences between C and NC were evident over the entire experimental periods (2020 and 2021), albeit differences were significant 4 out of 6 times in 2020 and 3 out of 7 times in 2021 (Figure 2).
Similarly, a positive effect of GM in comparison with NGM emerged in 2021, with differences that were significant 3 out of 7 times in the 2021 season (Figure 2), On average, SOM increased over time, varying between 1.8% (May 2020) and a maximum of 2.5% (September 2021) in C plots and of 2.1% (October 2021) in NC plots. As for green manuring, it varied from 2.15% (May 2021) to 2.4% (September 2021) in GM plots and from 1.7% (May 2021) to 2.2% (October 2021) in NGM plots.
Soil total N content was also greater under C and GM than under NC and NGM, respectively (Figure 2) but differences were significant 1 out of 6 times in the 2021 growing season when C and NC treatments were compared, while 4 out of 7 times in 2021 when GM and NGM were compared (Figure 2).
Overall, C/N ratio was greater under C and GM than under NC and NGM, respectively (Figure 2). Differences between C and NC treatments were significant in 4 out of 6 cases in the 2020 growing season while in 5 out of 7 cases in the 2021 season (Figure 2). On average, C/N increased from 9 (May 2020, which was the beginning of the experiment) to 13.5 and 11 in C and NC, respectively (November 2021 in both cases), and increased from 9 (May 2021) to 12.0 (November 2021) under GM conditions and from 7.8 (May 2021) to 12.5 (November 2021) under NGM conditions.
The NO3-N content was, in 7 out of 13 cases over the experimental period, higher in NC and NGM than in C and GM conditions (Figure 3), even though significantly only at the end of the growing season of 2020 (20 October 2020, C vs. NC; Figure 3) and at II and V sampling dates in 2021 (15 July and 30 September 2021, GM vs. NGM; Figure 3).
Soils under C conditions were richer in both P and K than NC. Differences were significant only on 9 and 23 July 2020 for P and on 12 November 2020, for K (Figure 3).
Soil water content was greater under C than NC conditions between 0.3 and 1.2 MPa in both years (Figure 4), with differences which were particularly evident in 2021 (Figure 4). Soil water content in the late part of the growing season (September in both years; Figure 5) was less than that measured in July 2020 and May 2021 (Figure 5). This result was evident over the entire soil matric potential interval and, particularly, in 2021 (Figure 5).
There was no significant difference between C and NC in LER and CGR in both years. (In 2020, on average (±standard error), LER was 0.92 (±0.01) leaves day−1 at 45–59 DAT interval and 0.35 (±0.01) leaves day−1 at 59–72 DAT interval, whereas CGR was 52.09 (± 0.65) kg ha−1 day−1 at 45–59 DAT interval and 68.88 (±1.34) kg ha−1 day−1 at 59–73 DAT interval. In 2021, LER was 0.40 (±0.00) leaves day−1 at 45–59 DAT interval and 0.65 (±0.07) leaves day−1 at 59–73 DAT interval, while CGR was 86.25 (±9.35) kg ha−1 day−1 at 45–59 DAT interval, 153.15 (±5.75) kg ha−1 day−1 at 59–73 DAT interval and 96.35 (±3.65) at 73–99 DAT interval.
As for the effect of green manuring treatment in 2021, results about LER and CGR are reported in Figure 6. In the 45–59 DAT interval, both parameters were significantly greater under NGM than GM conditions (Figure 5) but there was no significant difference between GM and NGM in the next time intervals (Figure 5).
The RWD was overall positively affected by organic amendment in both years although significantly only at 72 DAT in 2020 (Table 3).
The percentage variation C vs. NC and GM vs. NGM, measured at each sampling date, were generally positive except for C vs. NC at 101 DAT in 2020 or GM vs. NGM at 13 and 122 DAT in 2021 (Table 3).
There was no effect of both organic amendment and green manuring on CLY, WP and IWUE in 2020 (Table 4) but there were significant interactions in organic amendment × green manuring for all parameters in 2021 (Table 4, Figure 7). Overall, CLY, WP and IWUE responded better to green manure in plots managed without organic amendment, then reaching maxima values of 2.57 Mg ha−1, 0.42 kg m−3 gross ETc and 0.87 kg m−3 irrigation water, respectively (Figure 7).
Nitrogen accumulated in leaves as NO3-N (kg ha−1) did not change significantly with organic amendment in both years, except at the end of cropping in 2021 (Tab. 5). By contrast, there was a positive effect of green manuring in both the middle and late part of growing season (Table 5).
As for NAE (kg of cured product kg−1 N applied as mineral fertilizer), it was found to be higher under both C and GM than NC and NGM conditions (Table 6). In addition, in 2021, it was about double with respect to 2020 in all experimental conditions (Table 6).

4. Discussion

As already reported, the use of both compost and green manure can provide benefits on several intrinsic aspects of soil and crop quality [50,51,52,53]. In the present study, we specifically tested horse bean as green manure and OFMSW compost as soil amendment with the main aim to evaluate the potential impact of both agricultural practices on the cultivation routine of a dark fire-cured Kentucky tobacco crop grown in the Tuscan cultivation district (Central Italy). In that area, monoculture is currently practiced. As for OFMSW compost, a further advantage to recycle residues may be obtained since, otherwise, they would be discarded with both high energy and environmental costs [54].
In both years, the content of heavy metals of the compost used was lower than the legal limits (Table 2) as mandatory for marketable compost products to be used in agriculture. The additive effect, potentially determined by the dose used, should be considered minimized, considering the low amount of OFMSW compost applied. Yuksel [55] found that application of very high doses of MSW compost (40 to 200 Mg ha−1) produced increasing content of Cu, Zn, Ni, Cr, Cd and Pb in the soils but at concentrations that still were within the allowable legal limits [55].
In the present experiment, both treatments implied different doses of mineral N by synthetic products that were (i) 160 kg ha−1 (FND, in plots managed without both soil amendment and green manure), (ii) 100 kg ha−1 (RND, in plots managed with soil amendment but without green manure or without soil amendment but with green manure) and (iii) 50 kg ha−1 (MND, in plots managed with both soil amendment and green manure together). In our conditions, RND and MND saved approximately 38 and 69%, respectively, of nitrogen-based mineral synthetic fertilizers [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]. Thus, the carbon footprint of N (industry + agriculture) with both RND and MND fertilization management could be also successfully reduced [56,57,58].
Surprisingly, the interaction of organic amendment x green manuring was rarely significant (only for CLY, WP and IWUE in 2021, when treatments were factorially combined). Overall, CLY, WP and IWUE in the second year were always worse in plants fertilized using mineral N with synthetic products alone (NC and NGM combination).
According to results reported by other authors [14,52,59,60], both the applications of compost and green manure produced appreciable increases in SOM (i.e., +21%, C vs. NC on average over both the growing seasons, and +14%, GM vs. NGM on average over the 2021 growing season) and of main nutrients (N, P and K; i.e., +6, +20 and +27%, respectively, C vs. NC on average over both the growing seasons, and +10, +8 and +13%, respectively, GM vs. NGM on average over the 2021 growing season).
Interestingly, SOM increased from 1.8 (at the beginning of the experiment in 2020) to 2.5 and 2.4% at the end of September 2021, under OFMSW compost and horse bean green manure, respectively. Considering the OFMSW compost, this result should be considered very promising since it was obtained after just two years of compost application at a rate of about 12 Mg ha−1, markedly lower than rates adopted in other studies (i.e., from 25 to 80 Mg ha−1; [61,62,63]).
Several studies reported that as the SOM in soil increases, its ability to retain water, both at field capacity and at wilting point, improves accordingly [64]. The effects of increased SOM on water holding capacity were frequently investigated [11,12,65,66,67]. Interestingly, an increase of 1% of SOM was reportedly capable of increasing the soil water holding capacity by 180 to 230 m3 ha−1, or by 1.16 mm of water held in 100 mm soil depth, with the response depending on different soil textures. Regardless of texture groups, Hudson et al. [65] found that as SOM content increased from 0.5 to 3%, the available water capacity of the soil was more than doubled [65]. An increase of 1% of SOM was also capable (i) to pass a loamy soil, like that of the present experiment, from “medium-rich” to “rich” in organic matter [61,62,63,68,69] and (ii) to increase soil content in main nutrients (N, P and K; [61,62,63,68,69]).
Soil content of N in nitric form was higher under NC and NGM than under C and GM conditions, presumably because of a more rapid mineralization of the organic matter that occurred in those conditions as also confirmed by the values of the C/N ratio that were approximately equal to 8 over the entire experimental period (2020 and 2021). A C/N < 9 is typical of a rapid mineralization of the organic matter [3,63,70,71,72,73]. Otherwise, soils treated with OFMSW compost (C) or with horse bean green manure (MG) showed a C/N ranging between 9 and 12 (C) and between 9 and 11 (MG), that is typical of a slower release of N as well as of other nutrients. As a result, the potentially leachable amount of N in the soil could markedly be reduced and there could be more favorable conditions for a more efficient use of N by plants [70,73]. This is obviously true only when there is no problem of soil temperature, pH, etc. which could differently influence soil microbial activity [74,75,76,77].
As expected, soil water content over the entire soil matric potential interval (0.04 to 1.2 MPa) was greater under C than NC conditions, due to more organic matter in the soil of C plots [65,67,78]. Overall, the increment in soil water content of C with respect to NC was maximum at 1.2 MPa in both years, reaching 0.92% and 0.54% in July and September 2020, respectively, and 0.74 and 1.22% in May and September 2021, respectively. Moreover, when we calculated the available water content, we found that, interestingly, organic amendment did not produce any significant effect on this parameter [67]. It was about 12% in C and NC conditions in both years, despite the greater SOM of C than NC approximately over the entire growing periods (Figure 2). The exception was September 2021 when, surprisingly, available water content was greater under NC then C conditions (12.3 vs. 10.5%, respectively). In the present experiment, this reduced available water content under C conditions was a consequence of the increase in soil moisture retention around the wilting point as it appeared in both years and dates of measurements albeit more evident in May and September 2021, and in July 2020 (Figure 4). Irmak et al. [79] found similar results when they measured the effect of cover crops on field capacity, wilting point and soil water holding capacity: they suggested that the highest water content at wilting point was presumably a consequence of the increase in soil aggregation, determined by high SOM content due to cover crops, as also reported by previous studies [80].
The effect of both amendment and green manuring on RWD was generally positive [81,82,83]. Interestingly, the effect was virtually negative at the end of the cycle (Delta C vs. NC at 101 DAT in 2020 and Delta GM vs. NGM at 142 DAT in 2021; Table 3) but presumably because a large part of the functioning roots had moved into the deeper layers (below 0–0.3 m). In our conditions, a greater root weight density under C and GM conditions did not reflect a greater growth of above-ground plant parts, which appeared hardly affected by both treatments). As for the leaf emergence and crop growth rate, no effect of organic amendment, positive or negative, was recorded in both years, whereas green manuring appeared to slow down both leaf emergence and biomass accumulation, at least early in the season.
As expected, the accumulation of NO3-N in the leaves grew over time, following the same pattern of dry matter [48]. Overall, it slowed down in 2020, while it rapidly decreased in 2021, at the end of the growing season [48]. In addition, it appeared generally rather low in 2020, since it resulted in the range of 0–16% of the total leaf N, but quite high in 2021, as it was in the range from 0 to 45% of the total leaf N. It could be considered an indirect measure of how efficiently plants use N; in fact, the highest the amount of N accumulated as nitrates in the leaves, and the lowest amount of N was efficiently used for the building of functional organic molecules [84,85]. The lowest leaf contents of NO3-N were recorded at the end of the crop growth in 2021, it being a very positive result since fresh leaves with low content of nitric N after the curing period could potentially accumulate less nitrosamines (nitrates are one of the starting compounds for synthesis of tobacco-specific nitrosamines during the curing period; [86,87]). A low content of leaf NO3-N was not also evident at the end of season in 2020 because the field crop was stopped very early (at 101 DAT) when, presumably, leaves ripeness, which includes yellowing, breakdown of chlorophyll, and the N mobilization to roots to sustain nicotine synthesis, was not yet completed [35,48,88]. Overall, when we measured the N budget of the leaves (accumulation/depletion; [88]), regardless of treatments, we found that N accumulation prevailed on N depletion up to about the end of rapid growth in both years (59 DAT in 2020 and 73 DAT in 2021). As expected, N depletion prevailed on N accumulation in the tobacco leaves in the second part of both the experimental seasons (during leaves ripeness) but the rate of the depletion in the latter phase was greater in 2021 than in 2020 (7.2 and 1.7 kg ha−1 day−1, respectively).
Albeit N applied as mineral fertilizer (N in readily available form) was lowered by 38% when OFMSW compost and horse green manure were separately applied (RND fertilization regime) or by 69%, when both OFMSW compost and horse green manure were applied together (MND fertilization regime), CLY obtained by plants grown under C and GM conditions was not less than that obtained by plants under NC and NGM conditions (FND fertilization regime) [50,51,52,53]. This result also explained the greater NAE calculated under both C and GM with respect to NC and NGM since less N from synthetic products is used to obtain approximately the same amounts of cured product. The yield of 2021 more than doubled compared to yield of 2020, albeit obtained the same doses of mineral N, but also doubled accordingly the NAE [89]. Overall, mineral N fertilizer appeared underutilized in 2020 because only one harvest, instead of two like in the second year, was made due to hailstorm damages. Considering a sustainable management of tobacco crop, and with the aim to avoid the loss of efficiency of resources (water, N, etc.) use, it should be recommended to collect as much biomass as possible as commercial product and, consequently, as little biomass as possible should be left unused in the field [90]. It is well known that a lot of N applied as synthetic products by fertilization is not absorbed by the tobacco crop (for example, the maximum recovery fraction calculated on tobacco Burley type was just 45%; [48,91]) as well as by other species (a recovery fraction ranging between 30 and 55% was found in cereal crops; [90,92,93]). In this concern, cover crops could become greatly effective for recovering N not absorbed by the main crop in the cropping system.
Finally, both WP and IWUE in 2021 doubled with respect to 2020 as well as CLY, albeit irrigation volumes did not change in the two years (2584 and 2950 m3 ha−1 in 2020 and 2021, respectively). The seasonal irrigation volume was, in both years, greater than that recommended by the National and Regional extension services for this kind of tobacco in the same cultivation district (1950 m3 ha−1; [94]). Nevertheless, when we calculated the ratio Gross ETc/(Rainfall+Irrigation) [47] over the entire growing season, we found that in the present experiment, the tobacco crop went into stress in the driest year (2021), as the value of the ratio was higher than one (1.69 in 2021 vs. 1.02 in 2020). The stress was a consequence of the empirical management of irrigation by tobacco growers in the area. Overall, tobacco is a crop quite tolerant to very short periods of slight water stress, being durable, and hard stress generally reduces plant N uptake as well as growth, yield and, frequently, also quality of cured products [48,95].

5. Conclusions

Results obtained in this study provided very interesting indications, highlighting promising effects of both OFMSW compost and horse bean green manure in tobacco cropping.
Despite the fairly contained doses of compost used, and after just two years of organic amendment and green manuring (it is well known that both the practices here tested could be fully appreciated after several years), there were promising effects on soil intrinsic quality since contents of organic matter and main nutrients (N, P and K) increased. The C/N values recorded with both OFMSW compost and horse bean green manure were indicative of a slower release of N with respect to no organic amendment and no green manuring conditions (tobacco standard practice), confirming that they are good practices to face the crop’s N needs over the season and to reduce the potential water pollution due to nitrates.
Up to more than half the amount of N fertilizer using synthetic products was saved by using both organic amendment and green manuring, which means less potential carbon emissions due to production, transportation and field application of nitrogenous fertilizers.
The potential impact of both agricultural practices in the cultivation routine of dark fire-cured Kentucky tobacco crop appeared extremely positive. Further efforts should be made, i.e., to facilitate the supply of OFMSW compost at a local level, an essential condition for making this system fully operational.
Future studies should be addressed to evaluate the potential of (i) the organic amendment in improving the management of water shortage, i.e., when deficit irrigation must be practiced because of less water available for agriculture purposes and (ii) the cover crops, treated as green mulching instead of as green manuring.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.I.S., L.d.P. and M.P.; methodology, M.I.S., L.d.P., E.C. and M.P.; validation, M.I.S., L.d.P., E.C. and D.T.; formal analysis, M.I.S. and L.d.P.; investigation, M.I.S., L.d.P., E.C., M.S. and D.T.; resources, M.I.S.; data curation, M.I.S., L.d.P., E.C., M.P., D.T. and M.S.; writing—original draft preparation, M.I.S.; writing—review and editing, M.I.S. and L.d.P.; visualization, M.I.S. and L.d.P.; supervision, M.I.S. and L.d.P.; project administration, M.I.S.; funding acquisition, M.I.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Reg. UE n. 1305/2013—PSR 2014/2020—P.I.F. n. 38/2017 “Produzione e trasformazione del tabacco Kentucky di qualità per la produzione dei sigari a marchio TOSCANO”—Sottomisura 16.2. Progetto TA.KE.TO.—“Il Tabacco Kentucky Toscano: produzioni di qualità e pratiche agronomiche sostenibili nel rispetto dell’ambiente di coltivazione”.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article. They are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge Giorgio Stramacci, Leonardo Testa and Pasquale Speranza (MANIFATTURE SIGARO TOSCANO S.R.L.) for their valuable support throughout the project. A special thanks goes to Tullio Mancini and Graziano Lazzeroni for the excellent experimental tobacco field management.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

OFMSWOrganic fraction municipal solid waste
LERLeaf emergence rate
CGRCrop growth rate
RWDRoot weight density
CLYCured leaves yield
WPWater productivity
IWUEIrrigation water use efficiency
NAENitrogen agronomic efficiency
NFPNitrogen fertilization plan
FNDFull nitrogen dose
RNDReduced nitrogen dose
MNDMinimum nitrogen dose

References

  1. Hargreaves, J.C.; Adl, M.S.; Warman, P.R. A review of the use of composted municipal solid waste in agricolture. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2008, 123, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Chaker, R.; Gargouri, K.; Mbarek, H.B.; Maktouf, S.; Palese, A.M.; Celani, G.; Bouzid, J. Carbon and nitrogen balances and CO2 emission after exogenous organic matter application in arid soil. Carbon Manag. 2019, 10, 23–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Grzyb, A.; Wolna-Maruwka, A.; Niewiadomska, A. Environmental Factors Affecting the Mineralization of Crop Residue. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Sardarmehni, M.; Levis, J.W.; Barlaz, M.A. What is the Best End Use for Compost Derived from the Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Waste? Environ. Sci. Technol. 2021, 55, 73–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. White, K.E.; Brennan, E.B.; Cavigelli, M.A.; Smith, R.F. Winter cover crops increase readily decomposable soil carbon, but compost drives total soil carbon during eight years of intensive, organic vegetable production in California. PLoS ONE 2020, 6, e0228677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Mandal, U.K.; Singh, G.; Victor, U.S.; Sharma, K.L. Green manuring: Its effect on soli properties and crop growth under rice-wheat cropping system. Eur. J. Agron. 2003, 19, 225–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Rayns, F.; Rosenfeld, A.; Green Manures—Effects on Soil Nutrient Management and Soil Physical and Biological Properties. Report Number: Factsheet 24/10 Soil Grown Crops Projects FV 299 and 299a. 2010. Available online: https://www.organicresearchcentre.com/manage/authincludes/article_uploads/iota/technical-leaflets/green-manures-effects-on-soil-nutrient-management-and-soil-physical-and-biological-properties.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2024).
  8. Srivastava, V.; de Araujo, A.S.F.; Vaish, B. Biological response of using municipal solid waste compost in agriculture as fertilizer supplement. Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 2016, 15, 677–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. de Jesus Souza, B.; do Carmo, D.L.; Santos, R.H.S.; de Oliveira, T.S.; Fernandes, R.B.A. Residual Contribution of Green Manure to Humic Fractions and Soil Fertility. J. Soil Sci. Plant. Nutr. 2019, 19, 878–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Soumare, M.; Tack, F.M.G.; Verloo, M.G. Effects of a municipal solid waste compost and mineral fertilization on plant growth in two tropical agricultural soils of Mali. Bioresour. Technol. 2003, 86, 15–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. USDA-NDRC. 2015. Available online: https://www.nrdc.org/bio/lara-bryant/organic-matter-can-improve-your-soils-water-holding-capacity (accessed on 12 June 2024).
  12. Bhadha, J.H.; Capasso, J.M.; Khatiwada, R.; Swanson, S.; LaBorde, C. Raising Soil Organic Matter Content to Improve Water Holding Capacity: Sl447/Ss661, 10/2017. Edis 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Odzemir, S. Effects of municipal solid waste (MSW) compost on nodulation, plant growth and mineral composition of chickpea in marginal land. Fresenius Environ. Bull. 2005, 14, 599–604. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270159238 (accessed on 26 June 2024).
  14. Amlinger, F.; Peyr, S.; Geszti, J.; Dreher, P.; Nortcliff, S.; Beneficial effects of compost application on fertility and productivity of soils. Literature Study. Available online: https://www.bmk.gv.at/dam/jcr:c76251a9-663c-43ad-951d-068fa6c146ef/Studie_CompBenefits.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2024).
  15. Giannakis, G.V.; Kourgialas, N.N.; Paranychianakis, N.V.; Nikolaidis, N.P.; Kalogerakis, N. Effects of Municipal Solid Waste Compost on Soil Properties and Vegetables Growth. Compost Sci. Util. 2014, 22, 116–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Dada, O.A.; Mavengahama, S.; Kutu, F.R. Nutritional Quality and Popability of Popcorn (Zea mays L. var. everta) in Response to Compost and NPK 20-7-3 Application under Dryland Condition of South Africa. Int. J. Food Sci. 2023, 6115098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Maitra, S.; Zaman, A.; Mandal, T.K.; Bharati Palai, J. Green manures in agricolture: A review. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. 2018, 7, 1319–1327. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332556718 (accessed on 26 June 2024).
  18. Bavec, F.; Bavec, M. Underutilized Crops and Intercrops in Crop Rotation as Factors for Increasing Biodiversity on Fields. In Biodiversity in Ecosystems—Linking Structure and Function; Lo, Y.-H., Blanco, J.A., Shovonlal, R., Eds.; IntechOpen Ltd.: London, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Wright, A.J.; Mommer, L.; Barry, K.; van Ruijven, J. Stress gradients and biodiversity: Monoculture vulnerability drives stronger biodiversity effects during drought years. Ecology 2021, 102, e03193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bogužas, V.; Skinulienė, L.; Butkevičienė, L.M.; Steponavičienė, V.; Petrauskas, E.; Maršalkienė, N. The Effect of Monoculture, Crop Rotation Combinations, and Continuous Bare Fallow on Soil CO2 Emissions, Earthworms, and Productivity of Winter Rye after a 50-Year Period. Plants 2022, 11, 431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Mulkhovi, S.; Jacobi, J. Can monocultures be resilient? Assessment of buffer capacity in two agroindustrial cropping systems in Africa and South America. Agric. Food Sec. 2022, 11, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Biala, J. Short Report: The Benefits of Using Compost for Mitigating Climate Change; Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water New South Wales: Sydney, Australia, 2011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kaye, J.P.; Quemada, M. Using cover crops to mitigate and adapt to climate change. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2017, 37, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Schön, J.; Gentsch, N.; Breunig, P. Cover crops support the climate change mitigation potential of agroecosystems. PLoS ONE 2024, 19, e0302139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Smither-Kopperl, M.; Plant Guide for Fava Bean (Vicia faba). USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, Lockeford Plant Materials Center. Lockeford, CA 95237. 2019. Available online: https://plants.usda.gov/DocumentLibrary/plantguide/pdf/pg_vifa.pdf (accessed on 26 June 2024).
  26. FAOSTAT. 2022. Available online: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL (accessed on 25 June 2024).
  27. Davies, D.L.; Nielsen, M.T. Tobacco: Production Chemistry and Technology; Blackwell Science Ltd.: Oxford, UK, 1999; p. 840. ISBN 0-632-04791-7. [Google Scholar]
  28. Kenny, S.; Robert, P. (Eds.) Kentucky and Tennessee Tobacco Production Guide. Agriculture and Natural Resources Publications. Paper 74. 2014. Available online: http://uknowledge.uky.edu/anr_reports/74 (accessed on 18 July 2024).
  29. Robert, P.; Andy, B. Burley and Dark Tobacco Production Guide. 2024. Available online: https://www2.ca.uky.edu/agcomm/pubs/ID/ID160/ID160.pdf (accessed on 18 July 2024).
  30. Bai, Y.; Wang, G.; Cheng, Y.; Shi, P.; Yang, C.; Yang, H.; Xu, Z. Soil acidification in continuously cropped tobacco alters bacterial community structure and diversity via the accumulation of phenolic acids. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 12499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Chen, D.; Wang, M.; Wang, G.; Zhou, Y.; Yang, X.; Li, J.; Zhang, C.; Dai, K. Functional organic fertilizers can alleviate tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) continuous cropping obstacle via ameliorating soil physicochemical properties and bacterial community structure. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2022, 10, 1023693. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kurt, D.; Ayan, A.K. Effect of the different Organic Fertilizer Sources and Doses on Yeld in Ortanic Tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) Production. J. Agric. Fac. Graziosmanpasa Univ. 2014, 31, 7–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Zhai, Z.G.; Hu, Q.L.; Chen, J.R.; Liu, C.X.; Guo, S.; Huang, S.Q.; Zeng, W.A. Effects of combined application of organic fertilizer and microbial agents on tobacco soil and tobacco agronomic traits. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 594, 012023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Dai, P.; Cong, P.; Wang, P.; Dong, J.; Dong, Z.; Song, W. Alleviating Soil Acidification and Increasing the Organic Carbon Pool by Long-Term Organic Fertilizer on Tobacco Planting Soil. Agronomy 2021, 11, 2135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Chen, Y.; Ren, K.; He, X.; Gong, J.; Hu, X.; Su, J.; Yan, J.; Zhao, Z.; Zhu, Y.; Zou, C. Dynamic changes in physiological and biochemical properties of flue-cured tobacco of different leaf ages during flue-curing and their effects on yield and quality. BMC Plant Biol. 2019, 19, 555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Nyantika, M.M.; Sudoi, V.; Okeyo-Owour, J.B.; County, M. Tobacco farming using organic and inorganic fertilizers effect on soil quality in Migori County. Afr. Environ. Rev. J. 2022, 5, 327–334. Available online: http://ojs.uoeld.ac.ke/index.php/aerj (accessed on 26 June 2024).
  37. Wang, W.; Ma, W.; Zhao, W.; Han, T.; Tai, X.; Liao, D. Effect of Applying Organic Fertilizer to Tobacco Leaves on the Quality and Taste of Cigarettes. J. Biobased Mater. Bioenergy 2023, 17, 318–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Britt, C.S.; Slater, C.S. Ridged Rows and Winter Cover Crops in Tobacco Production. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1957, 21, 351–354. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Ellis, R.L.; Morgan, G.D.; Rhodes, N., Jr.; Muller, T.C. Cover crop management in no-till tobacco. Tob. Sci. 2000, 45, 44–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Hahn, S.L.; Woodley, A.L.; Vann, M.C. Winter cover crop management in the production of organic flue-cured tobacco. Agron. J. 2021, 113, 2698–2709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Sifola, M.I.; Cozzolino, E.; Di Mola, I.; Ottaiano, L.; del Piano, L.; Mori, M. Yield and Quality of Three Cultivars of Dark Fire-Cured (Kentucky) Tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) Subjected to Organic (Compost) and Mineral Nitrogen Fertilization. Agronomy 2022, 12, 483. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Regione Campania. 2024. Available online: http://www.agricoltura.regione.campania.it/disciplinari/DRD_254-20-12-23.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2024).
  43. Sifola, M.I.; Ianuario, S.; Carrino, L.; Cozzolino, E.; Lucibelli, A.; Coppola, A. A survey of N responses of Kentucky tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) yield and quality for cigars manufacture in the Benevento province (Southern Italy). Beitr. Zur Tab. Int. Contrib. Tob. Res. 2018, 28, 14–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Mipaaf. Disciplinare di Produzione del Tabacco Kentucky. Covarelli e Ventura. 2019. Available online: https://www.ontitalia.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Disciplinare_di_Produzione_Tabacco_Kentucky.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2024).
  45. Dane, J.H.; Hopmans, J.W. Water retention and storage. In Methods of Soil Analysis; Dane, J.H., Topp, G.C., Eds.; Soil Science Society of America: Madison, WI, USA, 2002; pp. 688–690. [Google Scholar]
  46. Amato, M.; Pardo, A. Root length and biomass losses during sample preparation with different screen mesh sizes. Plant Soil 1991, 161, 299–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Molden, D.; Accounting for Water Use and Productivity. SWIM Paper 1. Colombo, Sri Lanka: International Irrigation Management Institute. 1997. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/42765708_Accounting_for_water_use_and_productivity (accessed on 26 June 2024).
  48. Sifola, M.I.; Postiglione, L. The Effect of Nitrogen Fertilization on Nitrogen Use Efficiency of Irrigated and Non-Irrigated Tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.). Plant Soil 2003, 252, 313–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. MSTAT-C. A Microcomputer Program for Design Management and Analysis of Agronomic Research Experiments, version 1.4; ; Michigan State University: East Lansing, MI, USA, 1991.
  50. Diacono, M.; Montemurro, F. Long-Term effects of organic amendments on soil fertility. A Review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2010, 30, 401–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Adugna, G. A review on impact of compost on soil properties, water use and crop productivity. Acad. Res. J. Agri. Sci. Res. 2016, 4, 93–104. [Google Scholar]
  52. Sayara, T.; Basheer-Salimia, R.; Hawamdeh, F.; Sanchez, A. Recycling of organic wastes through composting: Process performance and compost Application in Agriculture. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Sumiahadi, A.; Acar, R.; Özel, A. Green Manure for Soil Properties Improvement. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Eurasian Conference on Science, Engineering and Technology (EurasianSciEnTech 2020), Gaziantep, Turkey, 7–9 October 2020; p. 1267. [Google Scholar]
  54. Hogg, D.; Favoino, E.; Nielsen, N.; Thompson, J.; Wood, K.; Penschke, A.; Economides, D.; Papageorgiou, S.; Economic Analysis of Options for Managing Biodegradable Municipal Waste—Final Report to the European Commission. Eunomia Research & Consulting. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/pdf/waste/compost/econanalysis_finalreport.pdf (accessed on 25 June 2024).
  55. Yuksel, O. Influence of municipal solid waste compost application on heavy metal content in soil. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2015, 187, 313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Bentrup, F.; Hoxha, A.; Christiensen, B. Carbon footprint analysis of mineral fertilizer production in Europe and other world regions. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Life Cycle Assessment of Food (LCA Food 2016), Dublin (UCD), Dublin, Ireland, 19–21 October 2016; Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312553933_Carbon_footprint_analysis_of_mineral_fertilizer_production_in_Europe_and_other_world_regions (accessed on 26 June 2024).
  57. Chai, R.; Ye, X.; Ma, C.; Wang, Q.; Tu, R.; Zhang, L.; Gao, H. Greenhouse gas emissions from synthetic nitrogen manufacture and fertilization for main upland crops in China. Carbon Balance Manag. 2019, 14, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Menegat, S.; Ledo, A.; Tirado, R. Greenhouse gas emissions from global production and use of nitrogen synthetic fertilisers in agriculture. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 14490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Bona, D.; Cristoforetti, A.; Zanzotti, R.; Bertoldi, D.; Dellai, N.; Silvestri, S. Matured Manure and Compost from the Organic Fraction of Solid Waste Digestate Application in Intensive Apple Orchards. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 15512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Sarker, P.R.; Rahman, M.; Al Mamun, A.; Nahar, N.; Tipu, M.M.H. Application of Municipal Solid Waste Compost and Green Manure Exerted Residual Effects on Soil Nutrient Content and Plant Nutrient Uptake in Rice. Int. J. Plant Soil Sci. 2023, 35, 158–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Cherif, H.; Ayaria, F.; Ouzari, H.; Marzorati, M.; Brusetti, L.; Jedidi, N.; Hassen, A.; Daffonchio, D. Effects of municipal solid waste compost, farmyard manure and chemical fertilizers on wheat growth, soil composition and soil bacterial characteristics under Tunisian arid climate. Eur. J. Soil Biol. 2009, 45, 138–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Cahyono, P.; Loekito, S.; Wiharso, D.; Afandi, R.A.; Nishimura, N.; Senge, M. Effects of compost on soil properties and yield of pineapple (Ananas comunus L. Merr.) on red acid soil, Lampung. Indonesia. Int. J. GEOMATE 2020, 19, 33–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Lucchetta, M.; Romano, A.; Alzate Zuluaga, M.Y.; Fornasier, F.; Monterisi, S.; Pii, Y.; Marcuzzo, P.; Lovat, L.; Gaiotti, F. Compost application boosts soil restoration in highly disturbed hillslope vineyard. Front. Plant Sci. 2023, 14, 1289288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Hudson, B.D. Soil Organic Matter and Available Water Capacity. J. Soil Water Conserv. 1994, 49, 189–194. Available online: https://www.jswconline.org/content/49/2/189 (accessed on 26 June 2024).
  65. Bashir, O.; Ali, T.; Baba, Z.A.; Rather, G.H.; Bangroo, S.A.; Mukhtar, S.D.; Naik, N.; Mohiuddin, R.; Bharati, B.; Bhat, R.A. Soil Organic Matter and Its Impact on Soil Properties and Nutrient Status. In Microbiota and Biofertilizers; Dar, G.H., Bhat, R.A., Mehmood, M.A., Hakeem, K.R., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; Volume 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Huntington, T.G. Available Water Capacity and Soil Organic Matter. In Encyclopedia of Soil Science, 2nd ed.; Taylor and Francis: New York, NY, USA, 2007; pp. 139–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Minasny, B.; McBratney, A.B. Limited effect of organic matter on soil available water capacity. Eur. J. Soil Sci. 2017, 69, 39–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Dadashi, S.; Sepanlou, M.G.; Mirnia, S.K. Influence organic compost compounds on soil chemical and physical properties. Int. J. Hum. Capital Urban Manag. 2019, 4, 15–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Kebede, T.; Diriba, D.; Boky, A. The Effect of Organic Solid Waste Compost on Soil Properties, Growth, and Yield of Swiss Chard Crop (Beta vulgaris L.). Sci. World J. 2023, 2, 6175746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Lynch, M.J.; Mulvaney, M.J.; Hodges, S.C.; Thompson, T.L.; Thomason, W.E. Decomposition, nitrogen and carbon mineralization from food and cover crop residues in the central plateau of Haiti. SpringerPlus 2016, 5, 973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. De Neve, S. Organic matter mineralization as a source of nitrogen. In Advances in Research on Fertilization Management of Vegetable Crops; Tei, F., Nicola, S., Benincasa, P., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 65–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. De Notaris, C.; Olesen, J.E.; Sørensen, P.; Rasmussen, J. Input and mineralization of carbon and nitrogen in soil from legume-based cover crops. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 2020, 116, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. van der Sloot, M.; Kleijn, D.; De Deyn, G.B.; Limpens, J. Carbon to nitrogen ratio and quantity of organic amendment interactively affect crop growth and soil mineral N retention. Crop Environ. 2022, 1, 161–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Andersson, S.; Nilsson, S.I. Influence of pH and temperature on microbial activity, substrate availability of soil-solution bacteria and leaching of dissolved organic carbon in a mor humus. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2001, 33, 1181–1191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Abaas, E.; Hill, P.W.; Roberts, P.; Murphy, D.V.; Jones, D.L. Microbial Activity Differentially Regulates the Vertical Mobility of Nitrogen Compounds in Soil. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2012, 53, 120–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Cao, H.; Chen, R.; Wang, L.; Jiang, L.; Yang, F.; Zheng, S.; Wang, G.; Lin, X. Soil pH, total phosphorus, climate and distance are the major factors influencing microbial activity at a regional spatial scale. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 25815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Zhang, S.; Zheng, Q.; Noll, L.; Hu, Y.; Wanek, W. Environmental effects on soil microbial nitrogen use efficiency are controlled by allocation of organic nitrogen to microbial growth and regulate gross N mineralization. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2019, 135, 304–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Lal, R. Soil organic matter and water retention. Agron. J. 2020, 112, 3265–3277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Irmak, S.; Sharma, V.; Mohammed, A.T.; Djaman, K. Impacts of cover crops on soil physical properties: Field capacity, permanent wilting point, soil-water holding capacity, bulk density, hydraulic conductivity, and infiltration. Trans. ASABE 2018, 61, 1307–1321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Jamison, V.C. Changes in air-water relationships due to structural improvement of soils. Soil Sci. 1953, 76, 143–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Gaiotti, F.; Marcuzzo, P.; Belfiore, N.; Lovat, L.; Fornasier, F.; Tomasi, D. Influence of Compost Addition on Soil Properties, Root Growth and Vine Performances of Vitis vinifera Cv Cabernet Sauvignon. Sci. Hortic. 2017, 225, 88–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Sifola, M.I.; del Piano, L.; Cozzolino, E.; Morra, L. Soil Quality Traits under a Crop of Dark Fire-Cured (Kentucky) Tobacco as Affected by Organic Fraction of Municipal Soil Wastes Compost and Green Manure. In Proceedings of the 51st Conference of the Italian Society of Agronomy, Padova, Italy, 19–21 September 2022; pp. 107–108. [Google Scholar]
  83. Al-Tawarah, B.; Alasasfa, M.A.; Mahadeen, A.Y. Efficacy of Compost and Vermicompost on Growth, Yield and Nutrient Content of Common Beans Crop (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). J. Ecol. Eng. 2024, 25, 215–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Darwinkel, A. Aspects of Assimilation and Accumulation of Nitrate in Some Cultivated Plants; Centre for Agricultural Publishing and Documentation: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 1975; Available online: https://edepot.wur.nl/308780 (accessed on 25 June 2024).
  85. Umar, A.S.; Iqbal, M. Nitrate accumulation in plants, factors affecting the process, and human health implications: A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2007, 27, 45–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Nestor, T.B.; Gentry, J.S.; Peele, D.M.; Riddick, M.G.; Conner, B.T.; Edwards, M.E. Roles of oxides of nitrogen in tobacco-specific nitrosamines formation in flue-cured tobacco. Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 2003, 20, 467–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Bovet, L.; Campanoni, P.; Lu, J.; Hilfiker, A.; Kleinhans, S.; Laparra, H.; Schwaar, J.; Lewis, R.S.; Matsuba, Y.; Ma, H.; et al. CLCNt2 Mediates Nitrate Content in Tobacco Leaf, Impacting the Production of Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamines in Cured Leaves. Front. Plant Sci. 2022, 13, 741078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  88. Sifola, M.I. Changes in leaf nitrogen content of Burley tobacco plants grown under different irrigation and nitrogen fertilization regimes. In Proceedings of the VII ESA Congress, Cordoba, Spain, 15–18 July 2002; pp. 463–464. [Google Scholar]
  89. Sifola, M.I.; del Piano, L.; Todisco, D.; Graziani, G.; Faugno, S.; Sannino, M.; Piscopo, R.; Salluzzo, A.; Cozzolino, E. A Multipurpose Sustainable Farming System for Tobacco Crops in the Mediterranean Area. Sustainability 2023, 15, 16636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Raun, W.R.; Johnson, G.V. Improving Nitrogen Use Efficiency for Cereal Production. Agron. J. 1999, 91, 357–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. MacKown, C.T.; Sutton, T.G. Recovery of Fertilizer Nitrogen Applied to Burley Tobacco. Agron. J. 1997, 89, 183–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Muchow, R.C. Effect of nitrogen partitioning and yield in grain sorghum under differing environmental conditions in the semiarid tropics. Field Crops Res. 1990, 25, 265–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Novoa, R.; Loomis, R.S. Nitrogen and plant production. Plant Soil 1981, 58, 177–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Regione Toscana. 2017. Available online: https://www301.regione.toscana.it/bancadati/atti/DettaglioAttiD.xml?codprat=2017AD00000000774 (accessed on 25 June 2024).
  95. Sifola, M.I.; Raimondi, G.; Maggio, A. Improving the sustainability of tobacco cultivation by optimizing nitrogen fertilization. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 2017, 11, 1399–1405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 16 06466 g001
Figure 1. Rainfall and minimum and maximum air temperature in 2020 (a) and 2021 (b) at the experimental site (Anghiari, AR; Central Italy). Symbols are sums (rainfall) and means (temperature) calculated over 10-day periods.
Figure 1. Rainfall and minimum and maximum air temperature in 2020 (a) and 2021 (b) at the experimental site (Anghiari, AR; Central Italy). Symbols are sums (rainfall) and means (temperature) calculated over 10-day periods.
Sustainability 16 06466 g001
Sustainability 16 06466 g002
Figure 2. The effect of organic amendment (on the left) and green manuring (on the right) on soil organic matter content (SOM), total N and C/N ratio over time in both experimental years (2020 and 2021). No interaction between treatments was significant. C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost; GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring. *, significant at p ≤ 0.05. For the sampling dates, see Section 2.
Figure 2. The effect of organic amendment (on the left) and green manuring (on the right) on soil organic matter content (SOM), total N and C/N ratio over time in both experimental years (2020 and 2021). No interaction between treatments was significant. C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost; GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring. *, significant at p ≤ 0.05. For the sampling dates, see Section 2.
Sustainability 16 06466 g002
Sustainability 16 06466 g003
Figure 3. The effect of organic amendment (on the left) and green manuring (on the right) on soil nutrients content (NO3-N, P and K) over time (2020 and 2021). No interaction between treatments was significant. C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost; GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring. *, significant at p ≤ 0.05. For the sampling dates, see Section 2.
Figure 3. The effect of organic amendment (on the left) and green manuring (on the right) on soil nutrients content (NO3-N, P and K) over time (2020 and 2021). No interaction between treatments was significant. C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost; GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring. *, significant at p ≤ 0.05. For the sampling dates, see Section 2.
Sustainability 16 06466 g003
Sustainability 16 06466 g004
Figure 4. The effect of organic amendment on soil water retention curves in 2020 and 2021. C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost.
Figure 4. The effect of organic amendment on soil water retention curves in 2020 and 2021. C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost.
Sustainability 16 06466 g004
Sustainability 16 06466 g005
Figure 5. The effect of seasonal dates on soil water retention curves under C and NC conditions in 2020 and 2021. C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost.
Figure 5. The effect of seasonal dates on soil water retention curves under C and NC conditions in 2020 and 2021. C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost.
Sustainability 16 06466 g005
Sustainability 16 06466 g006
Figure 6. The effect of green manuring on leaf emergence rate (LER) and crop growth rate (CGR) in 2021. GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring. Different letters indicate least significance differences at p ≤ 0.05.
Figure 6. The effect of green manuring on leaf emergence rate (LER) and crop growth rate (CGR) in 2021. GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring. Different letters indicate least significance differences at p ≤ 0.05.
Sustainability 16 06466 g006
Sustainability 16 06466 g007
Figure 7. The effect of organic amendment × green manuring interaction on the yield of cured leaves (CLY), the water productivity (WP) and the irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) in 2021. C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost; GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring. Different letters indicate least significance differences at p ≤ 0.01.
Figure 7. The effect of organic amendment × green manuring interaction on the yield of cured leaves (CLY), the water productivity (WP) and the irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) in 2021. C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost; GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring. Different letters indicate least significance differences at p ≤ 0.01.
Sustainability 16 06466 g007
Table 1. Physical and chemical characteristics of soil at the beginning of experiment (May 2020).
Table 1. Physical and chemical characteristics of soil at the beginning of experiment (May 2020).
Sand%48.1
Silt%28.8
Clay%23.1
Texure Loamy
Organic matter% d.w.1.8
N-Kjeldahlg kg−1 s.s.1.1
C/N 9.0
NO3-Nmg kg−1 d.w.14.4
Phosphorusmg kg−1 d.w.14.2
Potassiummg kg−1 d.w.209
pH 8.2
EC1:5dS/m0.120
Phosphorus, Olsen method; Potassium, Tetraphenylborate method; organic matter, Bichromate method; d.w., dry weight.
Table 2. Chemical composition of OFMSW compost.
Table 2. Chemical composition of OFMSW compost.
20202021Limit Value
Dry matter%85.483.250
Organic Carbon% d.w.30.828.9≥20
Humic and fulvic acids% d.w.7.37.5≥7
Total N% d.w.2.61.8---
Organic N% d.w.2.51.5≥80
C/N 11.716.3≤25
Phosphorus% d.w.0.50.3---
Potassium% d.w.1.21.1---
Cadmiummg kg−1 d.w.<0.05<0.051.5
Chromium VImg kg−1 d.w.<0.1<0.10.5
Mercurymg kg−1 d.w.<0.1<0.51.5
Nickelmg kg−1 d.w.<28.325.0100
Leadmg kg−1 d.w.<41.055.2140
Coppermg kg−1 d.w.126138230
Zincmg kg−1 d.w.157195500
pH 8.37.96–8.5
SalinityMeq 100 g−148.862.7---
d.w., dry weight. The limit values refer to Italian Legislative Decree No. 75 of 29 April 2010.
Table 3. The effect of organic amendment and green manuring on root weight density (RWD, mg cm−3).
Table 3. The effect of organic amendment and green manuring on root weight density (RWD, mg cm−3).
20202021
DAT4559721014573122142
Amendment (A)
C1.431.551.48 a2.232.763.632.853.24
NC1.131.310.85 b3.041.892.691.882.50
+26+18%+74%−27%+46%+35%+52%+30%
GM----2.173.632.392.53
NGM----2.482.692.343.21
−13%+35%+2%−22%
ANSNS*NSNSNSNSNS
GM----NSNSNSNS
A × GM----NSNSNSNS
The percentage variations due to organic amendment (C vs. NC) and green manuring (GM vs. NGM) in both experimental years were also reported. C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost; GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring; DAT, days after transplanting. Different letters indicate least significance differences at p ≤ 0.05. *, significant at p ≤ 0.05.
Table 4. The effect of organic amendment and green manuring on cured leaves yield (CLY, Mg ha−1), efficiency of water use as water productivity (WP, kg cured product m−3 gross ETc) and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE, kg cured product m−3 seasonal irrigation volume) in both experimental years.
Table 4. The effect of organic amendment and green manuring on cured leaves yield (CLY, Mg ha−1), efficiency of water use as water productivity (WP, kg cured product m−3 gross ETc) and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE, kg cured product m−3 seasonal irrigation volume) in both experimental years.
20202021
CLYWPIWUECLYWPIWUE
Amendment (A)
C0.9580.1940.3702.210.360.75
NC0.9490.1920.3672.410.390.82
Green manuring (GM)
GM---2.300.380.78
NGM---2.320.380.79
ANSNSNSNSNSNS
GM---NSNSNS
A × GM---******
C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost; GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring; ETc, crop evapotranspiration. **, significant at p ≤ 0.01.
Table 5. The effect of organic amendment and green manuring on N accumulated in leaves as NO3-N (kg ha−1) in both experimental years.
Table 5. The effect of organic amendment and green manuring on N accumulated in leaves as NO3-N (kg ha−1) in both experimental years.
20202021
DAT455972101455973122142
Amendment (A)
C0.662.207.116.650.932.946.663.960.32 b
NC0.712.188.956.680.532.425.917.661.08 a
Green manuring (GM)
GM----0.751.94 a5,969.41 a0.97
NGM----0.711.34 b6.612.21 b0.42
ANSNSNSNSNSNSNSNS*
GM----NS*NS*NS
A × GM----NSNSNSNSNS
C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost; GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring; DAT, days after transplanting. Different letters indicate least significance differences at p ≤ 0.05. *, significant at p ≤ 0.05.
Table 6. Nitrogen agronomic efficiency (NAE, kg kg−1 N mineral fertilizer applied) in both experimental years.
Table 6. Nitrogen agronomic efficiency (NAE, kg kg−1 N mineral fertilizer applied) in both experimental years.
20202021
NAE
Amendment (A)
C17.0 a30.6 A
NC09.5 b19.7 B
Green manuring (GM)
GM-31.5 A
NGM-25.6 B
A***
GM-**
A × GM-NS
C, OFMSW compost; NC, no OFMSW compost; GM, green manuring; NGM, no green manuring; Different letters indicate least significance differences at p ≤ 0.05 (lower case letters) and p ≤ 0.01 (capital letters). *, significant at p ≤ 0.05; **, significant at p ≤ 0.01.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sifola, M.I.; Cozzolino, E.; Todisco, D.; Palladino, M.; Sicignano, M.; del Piano, L. Organic Fraction Municipal Solid Waste Compost and Horse Bean Green Manure Improve Sustainability of a Top-Quality Tobacco Cropping System: The Beneficial Effects on Soil and Plants. Sustainability 2024, 16, 6466. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156466

AMA Style

Sifola MI, Cozzolino E, Todisco D, Palladino M, Sicignano M, del Piano L. Organic Fraction Municipal Solid Waste Compost and Horse Bean Green Manure Improve Sustainability of a Top-Quality Tobacco Cropping System: The Beneficial Effects on Soil and Plants. Sustainability. 2024; 16(15):6466. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156466

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sifola, Maria Isabella, Eugenio Cozzolino, Daniele Todisco, Mario Palladino, Mariarosaria Sicignano, and Luisa del Piano. 2024. "Organic Fraction Municipal Solid Waste Compost and Horse Bean Green Manure Improve Sustainability of a Top-Quality Tobacco Cropping System: The Beneficial Effects on Soil and Plants" Sustainability 16, no. 15: 6466. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16156466

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop