Next Article in Journal
Effects of No-Till Seeding and Fertilization on Vegetation Restoration and Soil Physicochemical Properties in Alpine Degraded Grazing Grasslands
Previous Article in Journal
Development of a Recombinase Polymerase Amplification and CRISPR-Cas12a-Based Assay for Rapid Detection of Rice Bakanae Disease Caused by Fusarium fujikuroi
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agronomy
Volume 15
Issue 3
10.3390/agronomy15030579
agronomy-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Alternative Phosphorus Fertilisation with Bio-Based Pellet Fertilisers: A Case of Study on Ryegrass (Lollium perenne L.)

by
Silvia Sánchez-Méndez
,
Lucía Valverde-Vozmediano
,
Luciano Orden
*,
Francisco Javier Andreu-Rodríguez
,
José Antonio Sáez-Tovar
,
Encarnación Martínez-Sabater
,
María Ángeles Bustamante
and
Raúl Moral
Centro de Investigación e Innovación Agroalimentaria y Agroambiental (CIAGRO-UMH), Universidad Miguel Hernández, Carretera de Beniel Km 3,2, 03312 Orihuela, Alicante, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agronomy 2025, 15(3), 579; https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15030579
Submission received: 27 January 2025 / Revised: 22 February 2025 / Accepted: 24 February 2025 / Published: 26 February 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Organic and Organomineral Fertilizers for Sustainable and Circular Agriculture)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The European Union (EU) advocates for a sustainable agricultural model with reduced synthetic fertiliser use. This study compares different high-P organo-mineral pellet fertilisers (OMFs) and their effects on crop yield. A trial was conducted under controlled conditions in ryegrass (Lollium perenne L.) pots with different organo-mineral fertilisation strategies at sowing with adjusted doses of P (120 kg P ha−1) and N (200 kg N ha−1). Pellets were developed from compost enriched with bone meal (OMF-BON), struvite (OMF-STR), and monoammonium phosphate (OMF-MAP). Conventional fertilisers (Complex15 and MAP) and alternative unpelletised/pelletised sources (STR and BON) were also tested. The experimental design included an unfertilised control (C), and treatments were carried out in triplicate (N = 24). Over 40 days, three cuttings (10, 25, and 40 days) were collected to determine fresh/dry biomass, nutrient content, and N, P, and K extraction efficiency. Soil labile parameters were influenced by the application of fertilisers especially OMF-MAP, OMF-STR, and MAP. MAP and STR yielded the highest nutrient extraction and biomass production, followed by their pelletised forms (OMF-MAP and OMF-STR). These results highlight the potential of pelletised organo-mineral fertilisers as sustainable alternatives to conventional sources.

1. Introduction

Phosphorus (P) is an essential nutrient for plant development and growth and is involved in physiological and metabolic processes [1,2]. Excessive P fertilisation leads to serious environmental problems such as the eutrophication of water bodies and the contamination of ground and surface water. In recent years, the European Union (EU) has paid increasing attention to fertiliser-related environmental pollution [3]. Traditional P fertilisers are based on rock phosphate, a non-renewable resource, to produce diammonium and monoammonium phosphate fertilisers (DAP and MAP), superphosphate (SSP), or nitrophosphate [4]. Inorganic synthetic fertilisers are produced with the energy input of natural gas. The EU fertiliser industry is highly dependent on external gas and relies on more than 90% of mineral P imports [5]. With the increase in energy prices in the second half of 2022, ammonia and MAP prices exceeded USD 1000 t−1, reaching a historical peak in the past 10 years [6]. The diversification of P fertiliser sources could increase the resilience of agricultural systems to geopolitical and environmental risks.
The EU emphasises the reduction in import dependence on P from exhaustible mineral deposits and the partial dependence on fossil fuels for the synthesis of N-fertiliser via the Haber–Bosch process [7]. Bioenergy and further processing of the by-product as fertiliser may be a promising approach [8]. The use of bio-based fertilisers reduces the EU’s dependence on imports of rock phosphate and energy, and is in line with the EU’s Green Deal and “from farm to fork” strategies, which promote the use of bio-based fertilisers and reduce nutrient losses due to poor fertilisation practices [9]. The change in fertilisation needs to be accompanied by a better N, P and K use efficiency (NUE, PUE, and KUE, respectively), which is the relationship between nutrient input and output [10]. This indicator is influenced by fertiliser type and management, soil factors, the climate, and crop management [11]. The use of compost in agriculture and its benefits for carbon sequestration and soil properties have been widely studied [12,13,14] as it improves soil health and fertility. However, the extensive use of compost as a fertiliser in agriculture can lead to difficulties in application, storage, and transport due to its low nutrient concentration.
Pelletisation is the densification of biomass by compression [15]. This technique has been widely used to produce biomass for energy production [16,17,18]. The compaction of compost into pellet form can overcome handling limitations [19]. However, pellet production on a commercial scale is expensive [20], and the pellets should contain a certain amount of nutrients. Compost often has a low nutrient content, so co-pelletising compost with other organic and inorganic fertilisers could be a solution for a sustainable fertiliser to support crop production. This will help to increase its acceptance by the EU farming community, as at present some recovered products (e.g., struvite) are still considered a waste in many countries and cannot be marketed as a fertiliser [21]. Recycled P sources, such as struvite extracted from municipal wastewater, are potential slow-release fertilisers [22,23] and animal by-products that can be used as organic fertilisers in agriculture. Secondary (recycled) P fertilisers are often characterised as slow-release with low solubility in water, which is a desirable property as slow assimilation into the substrate solution allows for high application rates without damaging plant roots [24]. The aim of this study is to compare the efficiency and agronomic performance of perennial ryegrass (Lollium perenne L.) using organic and organo-mineral pellets based on alternative organic matter (OM)-based P sources.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Pot Experimental Design

A pot trial with perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L. var. Belida) was carried out in the FertiLab-EPSO UMH (Spain) closed greenhouse under controlled conditions: temperature 21–25 °C, relative humidity 50–60%, and photoperiod 12 h/12 h (light/dark) with artificial lamps (RX600, Solray® 385, Helsinki, Finland). A completely randomised experimental design with seven treatments and three replicates per treatment was used, including an unfertilised control (n = 24). The treatments were as follows: (a) synthetic fertiliser complex (IN); (b) simple fertiliser (SF): monoammonium phosphate (MAP), struvite (STR), or bone meal (BON); and (c) organo-mineral pellets (OMFs): compost + MAP (OMF-MAP), compost + STR (OMF-STR), and compost + BON (OMF-BON) (Table 1). The plastic pots (Ø 11 cm, 1200 cm3) were filled with 1500 g of soil, placed randomly on the growth table, and moved periodically.
The soil used was prepared in accordance with the OECD 207.1984 [25] soil-based plant tests; it consisted of a mixture of natural loamy soil (0–20 cm depth, air-dried, and 5 mm sieved) collected at the EPSO-UMH experimental farm (38°4′9.066″ N, 0°59′6.148″ W) with fine and coarse sand (50:25:25%; w:w:w) to obtain a sandy loamy texture. The resulting synthetic soil had a granulometric distribution of 66% sand, 12% silt, and 22% clay, a soil bulk density of 1.43 kg m−3, an electrical conductivity (EC) of 3.75 mS m−1, an organic matter (OM) of 0.59%, and nutrient contents of 0.86 g kg−1 total nitrogen (TN), 1.62 mg kg−1 N-NH4+, 26.2 mg kg−1 N-NO3−, and extractable P (Pext) of 15.6 mg kg−1. The pH was corrected to a final value of 6.5 by the addition of FeSO4.

2.2. OMF Production

Compost was used as the organic base for the production of OMF pellets (Table 2). The compost (OMWC) was produced by large-scale waste windrow composting of a mixture of olive mill waste, poultry manure, and olive leaf waste in a ratio of 60:20:20 (v:v:v) [26]; it was air-dried and mixed with the inorganic nutrient source (i.e., mono ammonium phosphate for OMF-MAP) to produce the OMF.
The OMF pellets were produced at CompoLab-EPSO UMH (Spain) by extrusion of the mixtures using a low-power (4 kW) small-scale pelletiser (100 kg h−1 capacity) with two rotating rollers (78 mm) operating on a fixed flat die of 119 mm diameter, with 5 mm diameter holes. Three OMFs were obtained (Table 3). The physico-chemical characteristics were determined according to the methods of Paredes et al. [27].
The fertilisation treatments were applied at a normalised application rate of 120 kg P ha−1. The treatments were applied superficially, covered with soil (0.5 cm), and placed close to the seed to replicate field conditions with conventional machinery. Nitrogen supply was adjusted to 200 kg N ha−1 by applying KNO3 (13-0-46) to all pots to avoid other nutrient deficiencies and subsequent differences in yield and P uptake. After the treatments had been applied and distributed over the surface of the pot soil, 0.2 g of perennial ryegrass was sown in each pot (0.0095 m2) and then irrigated with 200 mL, with an additional 75 mL added after infiltration to bring the soil to 60% water holding capacity. The crop was irrigated manually by adding deionised water, maintaining the soil at field capacity by periodically checking the weight of the pots gravimetrically to adjust the amount of water lost through evapotranspiration. The experiment was carried out from the 3rd of April to the 12th of May 2023 (40 days).

2.3. Sampling and Analytical Methods

2.3.1. Soil Analysis

Three soil cores were taken from each pot after the last ryegrass cutting (40 days). Soil samples were air-dried at 60 °C and, after removing large roots, ground to <2 mm for analysis. Samples were analysed for pH and EC in a 1:2.5 soil/water (w/v) and in a 1:5 (w/v) soil/water ratio, respectively [28], as well as for total organic carbon (TOC) [29], total nitrogen Kjeldahl (TN) [30], and extractable P (Pext) [31]. Nitrate (N-NO3−) and ammonium (N-NH4+) were determined by extraction in 2 M KCl in 1:5 (w/v) by the MgO-Devarda alloy steam distillation method [32].

2.3.2. Plant Analysis

The ryegrass in each pot was cut 1.5 cm above the soil surface after 10, 25, and 40 days of growth, when the aerial part had reached a height of 10–15 cm. From each cut, the fresh aboveground biomass was weighed (g. pot−1) and dried at 60 °C for 48 h, and the dry biomass was weighed (g pot−1) [33]. Dry samples were ground and sieved (<1 mm) for chemical analysis. The total C and N content of the tissues was analysed using an automatic elemental microanalyser (EuroVector, Milan, Italy). The mineral composition (Ca, S, Mg, Cu, Fe, Mn, and Zn) of the tissues was determined by inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-OES) in the extract obtained after the nitric perchloric acid digestion (HNO3/HClO4, 2:1 v/v) using a microwave [34]. Total P (TP) was measured in a UV-V spectrophotometer. Total K and Na were measured with a flame photometer.
Nutrient use efficiency was calculated as the ratio between the nutrient application rate of the fertilisers and the nutrient uptake [35]. Nitrogen use efficiency (NUE), phosphorus use efficiency (PUE), and potassium use efficiency (KUE) were calculated.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

Statistically significant differences between the eight treatments were assessed by one-way analysis of variance (one-way ANOVA), with fertiliser type as a factor, using the Infostat v.2020 statistical software package linked to the R programme environment [36]. The normality of the data was tested using the Shapiro–Wilk test, and the homogeneity of variance was assessed and confirmed using the Levene test (p > 0.05). The Fisher LSD test was used to analyse significant differences and multiple comparisons between the different treatments at a 5% significance level (p < 0.05).

3. Results

3.1. Soil Parameters

The soil parameters analysed show high significant differences between the treatments (Table 4). The pH was slightly alkaline in all the soils. Only the soils fertilised with IN showed a lower pH (−2.2%) than the control, with significant differences (p < 0.01). For EC, the soils fertilised with MAP and BON and their corresponding pellets showed significant differences (p < 0.0001) with the highest EC (+6.9%), followed by STR, OMF-STR, and IN without significant differences compared to the control.
For OM, all treatments significantly increased soil OM compared to the control (p < 0.0001). Changes in OM concentration showed that IN and MAP increased their OM values, followed by OMF-MAP and OMF-STR, probably due to the high organic matter content in these OMFs. Carbon sequestration (C stock) showed the same trend as OM, with significant differences between treatments.
TNwas significantly higher in the soils treated with IN (p < 0.01), due to the contribution of the inorganic forms of the mineral fertiliser (15-15-15). There were no significant differences between the other fertiliser treatments and the control. The most abundant inorganic form of N in the soil was N-NO3−. All fertilisation treatments significantly increased N-NO3− (p < 0.0001). Soils fertilised with OMF pellets had the highest N-NO3− content, followed by soils fertilised with non-pelleted sources (MAP, STR, and BON). All fertilised soils had significantly higher N-NH4+ contents than the control soil, especially those with OMF-STR and OMF-BON, which had the highest N-NH4+ contents.
Extractable P was significantly higher with the application of MAP and OMF-MAP (p < 0.0001). The rest of the treatments were higher than the control except STR and OMF-BON, which did not show significant differences between them.

3.2. Crop Response to Fertiliser

3.2.1. Nutrient Uptake

Significant differences (p < 0.0001) were observed for nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium uptake concentrations in dry plant tissue (Figure 1a and Supplementary Materials Table S1) and for cumulative uptake (Figure 1b). Regarding N uptake, ryegrass with single fertilisers (STR and BON) and MAP had the highest N concentration in the first cut after 10 days. For all treatments, the N concentration in the plant tissue peaked at 25 days. N uptake was highest on the 25th day after sowing in plants treated with IN, MAP, STR, and OMF-MAP, but the concentration decreased at the end of the trials, although STR and MAP still had the highest N uptake, followed by IN, BON, and OMF-BON. OMF-MAP showed a strong decrease.
All fertilisation treatments exceeded the cumulative N uptake of unfertilised plants (p < 0.0001). MAP and STR obtained significantly higher uptake than the other treatments, followed by their complex forms pelletised with compost (OMF-MAP and OMF-STR); the lowest uptake was suffered by plants fertilised with the organic pellet OMF-BON.
For P extraction, the crops differed significantly according to the fertiliser type (p < 0.0001). Ryegrass fertilised with OMF-STR suffered an increase during the cycle and reached a peak of extraction at the end of the experiment; this was the treatment with the second highest P uptake treatment after IN. P extraction in plants treated with BON and STR followed a negative linear decrease. BON was the worst treatment in terms of P uptake. The best P uptake treatment was IN, followed by MAP and OMF-STR.
The evolution of K uptake for the treatments was similar to that of N and P, reaching a peak at day 25 after sowing, except for OMF-BON, which reached the highest uptake at the end of the cycle (day 40) after a linear increase. At the end of the experiment, significant differences were observed between the pots fertilised with MAP and STR (p < 0.0001), which obtained the highest uptake. OMF-STR and BON achieved similar K concentrations at day 40. All fertilisation treatments exceeded the K concentration of the unfertilised plants, and the cumulative K uptake was significantly higher (p < 0.0001).

3.2.2. Yield and Nutrient Use Efficiency

At harvest, the fresh and dry biomass showed significant differences between treatments in yield performance (p < 0.0001) (Figure 2 and Supplementary Materials Table S2). In all treatments evaluated, higher yields were observed in the last cut (40 days). The most productive pots were those fertilised with the inorganic fertilisers MAP and STR, which gave the highest yields, followed by their pelletised forms (OMF-MAP and OMF-STR), and this tendency was maintained throughout the experiment.
Nitrogen use efficiency (NUE), phosphorus use efficiency (PUE), and potassium use efficiency (KUE) showed significant differences (p < 0.0001) (Table 5). The synthetic fertiliser MAP and struvite (STR) gave the highest NUE, followed by OMF-STR and IN. OMF-MAP and OMF-STR exceeded the NUE of the organic pellet OMF-BON with +12.66% and +15.88%, respectively. MAP and OMF-STR were the fertilisers with the highest PUE, followed by IN, STR, and OMF-MAP. BON and OMF-BON did not perform well. Among all nutrient efficiencies, potassium had the highest efficiency in the IN treatment, probably due to overfertilisation. The lowest KUE was found in plants treated with BON and in the OMF pellets.

4. Discussion

4.1. Effects of Fertilisation on Soil Properties

The increase in pH was more pronounced in the pots fertilised with OMF-BON, which may be due to its own pH value. The pH of the pots fertilised with IN decreased compared to the control because the N form of this fertiliser is 15% ammonium and this cation causes the acidification of the soil due to the nitrification of this form [37,38]. EC decreased at the end of the experiment because of the possible leaching of salts that may have occurred due to irrigation. Pots with BON, MAP, and their corresponding pellet forms (OMF-BON and OMF-MAP) showed the highest soil conductivity values, which can be attributed to the high solubility of the fertilisers [39].
Organic matter remained largely within the range of the initial soil value. Soils treated with IN had the highest OM (%) and carbon sequestration. In this case, a negative priming effect may have occurred due to the accumulation of OM in the soil and its sequestration in C form [40,41]. In general, all of the fertilisers applied had a C/N ratio <10, indicating that the mineralisation of OM had occurred during the cycle [42,43]. Soils fertilised with OMF-MAP and OMF-STR had a higher NO3-N concentration than the corresponding single fertilisers (MAP and STR). Antille et al. [44] also reported a higher content of soil mineral nitrogen content in organo-mineral-fertilised soils compared to inorganic fertilised soils in a pot experiment with perennial ryegrass.
Extractable P in the soil post-harvest was higher than in the initial soil, due to the longer solubilisation time. It can be observed that the control treatment and STR had similar values of available P, which this could be attributed to P consumption by the plant, since plants treated with this fertiliser obtained the highest use efficiency among simple, organic, and organo-mineral fertilisers as reported by Vaneeckhaute et al. [45] in a greenhouse experiment fertilised with struvite in a sandy soil.
MAP and the organo-mineral fertiliser OMF-MAP obtained the highest concentration of extractable P on the soils, but a low P concentration was exported to the plant at the end of the experiment (Figure 1), which could be due to the organic C fraction on organic and organo-mineral pellets that is adsorbed by the soil colloid particles blocking P sorption sites [46,47]. Other studies using organo-mineral fertilisers with vermicompost as the OMF matrix with inorganic P suggest that organic matter in close contact with inorganic P sources causes the immobilisation of the nutrient [48,49].

4.2. Effects of Fertilisation on Yield

Low nutrient uptake by plants was observed in the biomass at day 10 (Figure 1a), especially in the plants treated with organic and organo-mineral fertilisers (OMF-MAP, OMF-STR, OMF-BON, and BON), which could be attributed to the low initial availability of nutrients in the soil solution with this type of fertiliser [50]. The peak extraction of nutrients at day 25 suggests that nutrient availability was higher at this time and that intense mineralisation occurred after the first cut occurred [51]. Some fertilisers such as BON and OMF-BON showed linear trends in nutrient uptake, probably due to their stability on the soil.
N uptake was higher in pots treated with the synthetic fertilisers MAP and STR than with their pelleted forms (OMF-MAP and OMF-STR), similarly to other studies that found lower uptake with OMF than with synthetic N fertilisers [44,52]. In terms of P evolution, the behaviour of STR can be highlighted with respect to the behaviour of its pelleted form: OMF-STR and STR reached the same peak at 25 days but, in the last cut, OMF-STR maintained it, while grass fertilised with STR showed a lower P concentration, which could be due to a slower release of P from OMF-STR because of the binding of STR and organic matter [53,54]. K uptake peaks were more pronounced in plants fertilised with OMF-MAP and IN; these two fertilisers had the highest K content apart from OF-BON. The cumulative concentrations of N and K on the plants were higher than those of P due to the low mobility of this nutrient and its immobilisation in the soil. This could also be due to the overfertilisation of K with the KNO3, which was included in the P fertiliser treatments (MAP, STR, BON, OMF-STR, OMF-MAP, and OMF-BON) to adjust the dose to 200 kg N ha−1.
Cumulative K uptake followed the same pattern as N uptake, but, in this case, the application rate of these fertilisers had an influence on uptake. The fertilisation treatments were only adjusted for the N rate and, for P, the K content of the OMFs increased. As Pampurro et al. [55] found in a pot experiment on maize with compost pellets that plants had lower K and N concentrations than with mineral N-P-K fertilisation, in our case, all fertilisers outperformed the organic fertilisers (BON and OMF-BON) in N, P, and K concentrations, probably because of their high organic C concentrations; these fertilisers enhance carbon sequestration but cannot provide immediate nutrient availability in the short term, unlike organo-mineral fertilisers [56,57].
A positive relationship between N uptake and fresh and dry yield has been observed [53,54]. Yield depends on the type of fertiliser and the nutrient release of the fertilisers. In our study, little difference in yield was observed between MAP, STR and its pellet forms, and IN. Other authors [58] also observed an increase in yield between OMFs with biosolids and urea fertilisation in a ryegrass study. Despite the high concentration of NO3− in the soil of the pots fertilised with OMF-BON and BON, this was not reflected in a higher yield in these pots, which could be due to an accumulation of available nutrients in the soil [59,60].
The N-use efficiency of organo-mineral phosphorus fertilisers was 12% lower than that of synthetic and straight fertilisers. Similar results have been found in other experiments [58]. KUE was higher than PUE due to the overfertilisation of potassium in some of the treatments, as the K rate was not considered in the balanced fertilisation. The main source of K in all treatments was KNO3, but the fertilisers applied also contributed to K fertilisation. The experiment shows that crops with the higher K dose obtained a lower KUE, similar to the results obtained by Yin et al. [61], where KUE decreased as the K rate increased. The highest PUE was obtained in pots fertilised with MAP, which exceeded the value of the other treatments by 1.5%; STR and OMF-STR did not show significant differences, suggesting a similar behaviour of both fertilisers for PUE. The efficiency of P was generally lower than NUE and KUE because the uptake and the rate were lower; also, it has been mentioned that P can be immobilised by the organic complexes in the soil, limiting its uptake [46].

5. Conclusions

The experiment shows that the application of organo-mineral fertilisers for the supply of nitrogen and phosphorus to ryegrass in Mediterranean soils under irrigation affected the levels of labile nutrients in the soil. Carbon sequestration took place and the mineralisation process was higher in the pots fertilised with organo-mineral sources. The yield and nutrient use efficiency of OMFs also gave comparable results, with less efficiency loss when comparing the application of the fertilisers and their pellet forms.
These organo-mineral fertilisers could be incorporated into an integrated fertiliser management system without major production losses, and would also add organic matter to the soil, contributing to its conservation and health. The results indicate that there is potential for recycled P to partially replace conventional synthetic fertilisers, thereby promoting recycling and the circular economy. However, further research is needed to fully validate the behaviour of these organo-mineral fertilisers in Mediterranean soils.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/agronomy15030579/s1, Table S1: Ryegrass N, P, and K nutrient uptake at harvest; Table S2: Ryegrass yield during ryegrass growth.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.O., M.Á.B. and R.M.; methodology M.Á.B. and R.M.; software, S.S.-M. and L.O.; validation, S.S.-M. and L.V.-V.; formal analysis, L.O., E.M.-S. and J.A.S.-T.; investigation, S.S.-M., L.V.-V., L.O. and F.J.A.-R.; resources, F.J.A.-R. and R.M.; writing—review and editing, S.S.-M., L.O. and M.Á.B.; visualisation, J.A.S.-T., E.M.-S., F.J.A.-R. and M.Á.B.; funding acquisition, R.M.; project administration, R.M. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study forms part of the AGROALNEXT/2022/016 programme and was supported by MCIN with funding from European Union NextGenerationEU (PRTR-C17.I1) and by Generalitat Valenciana. The compost used for the manufacture of the organo-mineral fertilisers was provided by the AGROCOMPOSTAJE Collaboration Agreement between the Generalitat Valenciana, through the Department of Agriculture, Rural Development, Climate Emergency and Ecological Transition, and the Miguel Hernández University of Elche.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

References

  1. Hammond, D. Agronomy: Canola; AOCS Press: Urbana, IL, USA, 2011; pp. 93–117. ISBN 9780981893655. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bian, Z.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Li, T.; Grundy, S.; Yang, Q.; Cheng, R. A review of environment effects on nitrate accumulation in leafy vegetables grown in controlled environments. Foods 2020, 9, 732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Vaneeckhaute, C.; Ghekiere, G.; Michels, E.; Vanrolleghem, P.A.; Tack, F.M.G.; Meers, E. Assessing Nutrient Use Efficiency and Environmental Pressure of Macronutrients in Biobased Mineral Fertilizers: A Review of Recent Advances and Best Practices at Field Scale. Adv. Agron. 2014, 128, 137–180. [Google Scholar]
  4. Nadarajan, S.; Sukumaran, S. Chemistry and toxicology behind chemical fertilizers. In Controlled Release Fertilizers for Sustainable Agriculture, 2nd ed.; Lewu, F.B., Volova, T., Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2021; pp. 195–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Eurostat. European Commission. Agri-Environmental Indicator Mineral Fertiliser Consumption. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?oldid=656189#Analysis_at_EU_level (accessed on 10 November 2024).
  6. FAO. Developments in International Fertilizer Markets. Available online: https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/e379efe6-a955-4ffc-bb53-0c9a89f11f1a/content (accessed on 10 November 2024).
  7. Galloway, J.N.; Townsend, A.R.; Erisman, J.W.; Bekunda, M.; Cai, Z.; Freney, J.R.; Martinelli, L.A.; Seitzinger, S.P.; Sutton, M.A. Transformation of the nitrogen cycle: Recent trends, questions, and potential solutions. Science 2008, 320, 889–892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Vaneeckhaute, C.; Meers, E.; Michels, E.; Buysse, J.; Tack, F.M.G. Ecological and economic benefits of the application of bio-based mineral fertilizers in modern agriculture. Biomass Bioenerg. 2013, 49, 239–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. European Union. Farm to Fork Strategy. Available online: https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontal-topics/farm-fork-strategy_en (accessed on 10 November 2024).
  10. Lassaletta, L.; Billen, G.; Grizzetti, B.; Anglade, J.; Garnier, J. 50 year trends in nitrogen use efficiency of world cropping systems: The relationship between yield and nitrogen input to cropland. Environ. Res. Lett. 2014, 9, 105011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Yu, X.; Keitel, C.; Dijkstra, A.F. Global analysis of phosphorus fertilizer use efficiency in cereal crops. Glob. Food Secur. 2021, 29, 100545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Vico, A.; Sáez, J.A.; Pérez-Murcia, M.D.; Martinez-Tomé, J.; Andreu-Rodríguez, J.; Agulló, E.; Bustamante, M.A.; Sanz-Cobena, A.; Moral, R. Production of spinach in intensive Mediterranean horticultural systems can be sustained by organic-based fertilizers without yield penalties and with low environmental impacts. Agric. Syst. 2020, 178, 102765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Sayara, T.; Basheer-Salimia, R.; Hawamde, F.; Sánchez, A. Recycling of Organic Wastes through Composting: Process Performance and Compost Application in Agriculture. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Martínez-Sabater, E.; Pérez-Murcia, M.D.; Andreu-Rodríguez, F.J.; Orden, L.; Agulló, E.; Sáez-Tovar, J.; Martínez-Tome, J.; Bustamante, M.Á.; Moral, R. Enhancing Sustainability in Intensive Dill Cropping: Comparative Effects of Biobased Fertilizers vs. Inorganic Commodities on Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Crop Yield, and Soil Properties. Agronomy 2022, 12, 2124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zajonc, O.; Frydrych, J.; Jezerska, L. Pelletization of Compost for Energy Utilization. IERI Procedia 2015, 8, 2–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Stelte, W.; Holm, J.K.; Sanadi, A.R.; Barsberg, S.; Ahrenfeldt, J.; Henriksen, U.B. A study of bonding and failure mechanisms in fuel pellets from different biomass resources. Biomass Bioenergy 2011, 35, 2–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ilari, A.; Foppa-Pedretti, E.; De Francesco, C.; Duca, D. Pellet Production from Residual Biomass of Greenery Maintenance in a Small-Scale Company to Improve Sustainability. Resources 2021, 10, 122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Sarker, T.R.; Nanda, S.; Meda, V.; Dalai, A.K. Densification of waste biomass for manufacturing solid biofuel pellets: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2023, 21, 231–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chew, K.W.; Chia, S.R.; Yap, Y.J.; Ling, T.C.; Tao, Y.; Show, P.L. Densification of food waste compost: Effects of moisture content and dairy powder waste additives on pellet quality. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2018, 116, 780–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Alege, F.P.; Gu, X.; Tao, H.; Miito, G.J.; Ndegwa, P.M. Dairy manure compost pelleting process: A techno-economic analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 310, 127481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Robles-Aguilar, A.A.; Grunert, O.; Meers, E.; Jablonowski, N.D. Evaluating the Fertilising Potential of Blended Recovered Nutrients in Horticultural Growing Medium on Viola x wittrockiana L. Agronomy 2022, 12, 182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Doyle, D.J.; Parsons, S.A. Struvite formation, control and recovery. Water Res. 2002, 36, 3925–3940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Talboys, P.J.; Heppell, J.; Roose, T.; Healey, J.R.; Jones, D.L.; Withers, P.J. Struvite: A slow-release fertiliser for sustainable phosphorus management? Plant Soil 2016, 401, 109–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Bogdan, A.; Robles-Aguilar, A.A.; Liang, Q.; Pap, S.; Michels, E.; Meers, E. Substrate-Driven Phosphorus Bioavailability Dynamics of Novel Inorganic and Organic Fertilizing Products Recovered from Municipal Wastewater—Tests with Ryegrass. Agronomy 2022, 12, 292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Clemente, R.; Sáez-Tovar, J.A.; Bernal, M.P. Extractability, distribution among different particle size fractions, and phytotoxicity of Cu and Zn in composts made with the separated solid fraction of pig slurry. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2020, 4, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. García-Rández, A.; Orden, L.; Marks, E.A.N.; Andreu-Rodríguez, F.J.; Franco-Luesma, S.; Martínez-Sabater, E.; Sáez-Tovar, J.A.; Pérez-Murcia, M.D.; Agulló, E.; Bustamante, M.A.; et al. Monitoring of greenhouse gas emissions and compost quality during olive mill waste co-composting at industrial scale: The effect of N and C sources. J. Waste Manag. 2025, 193, 33–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Paredes, C.; Pérez-Murcia, M.D.; Pérez-Espinosa, A.; Bustamante, M.A.; Moreno-Caselles, J. Recycling of two-phase olive-mill cake “Alperujo” by co-composting with animal manures. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2015, 46, 238–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Bustamante, M.A.; Paredes, C.; Moral, R.; Moreno-Caselles, J.; Pérez-Murcia, M.D.; Pérez- Espinosa, A.; Bernal, M.P. 2007. Co-composting of distillery and winery wastes with sewage sludge. Water Sci. Technol. 2007, 56, 187–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Nelson, D.W.; Sommers, L.E. Total Carbon, Organic Carbon, and Organic Matter. In Methods of Soil Analysis; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1996; pp. 961–1010. ISBN 978-0-89118-866-7. [Google Scholar]
  30. Bremner, J.M.; Mulvaney, C.S. Nitrogen-Total. In Methods of Soil Analysis; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1983; pp. 595–624. ISBN 978-0-89118-977-0. [Google Scholar]
  31. Olsen, S.; Cole, C.; Watanabe, F.; Dean, L. Estimation of available phosphorus in soils by extraction with sodium bicarbonate. In USDA Circular Nr 939; United States Government Print Office: Washington, DC, USA, 1954. [Google Scholar]
  32. Bremmer, J.M.; Keeney, D.R. Steam distillation methods for determination of ammonium nitrate and nitrite. Anal. Chim. Acta 1965, 32, 485–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wang, J.; Dimech, A.M.; Spangenberg, G.; Smith, K.; Badenhorst, P. Rapid screening of nitrogen use efficiency in perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) using automated image-based phenotyping. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 565361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Kabata-Pendias, A. Trace Elements in Soils and Plants, 4th ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  35. López-Bellido, L.; López-Bellido, J.; Redondo, R. Nitrogen efficiency in wheat under rainfed Mediterranean conditions as affected by split nitrogen application. Field Crop. Res. 2005, 94, 86–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Di Rienzo, J.; Casanoves, F.; Balzarini, M.G.; Gonzalez, L.; Tablada, M.; Robledo, C.W. InfoStat, Version 2020; FCA Universidad Nacional de Córdoba: Córdoba, Argentina, 2020.
  37. Bouman, O.T.; Curtin, D.; Campbell, C.A.; Biederbeck, V.O.; Ukrainetz, H. Soil acidification from long-term use of anhydrous ammonia and urea. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1995, 59, 1488–1494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Kavvadias, V.; Ioannou, Z.; Vavoulidou, E.; Paschalidis, C. Short term effects of chemical fertilizer, compost and zeolite on yield of lettuce, nutrient composition and soil properties. Agriculture 2023, 13, 1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Scotti, R.; Pane, C.; Spaccini, R.; Palese, A.M.; Piccolo, A.; Celano, G.; Zaccardelli, M. On-farm compost: A useful tool to improve soil quality under intensive farming systems. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2016, 107, 13–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mazzilli, S.R.; Kemanian, A.R.; Ernst, O.R.; Jackson, R.B.; Piñeiro, G. Priming of soil organic carbon decomposition induced by corn compared to soybean crops. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2014, 75, 273–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Kuzyakov, Y.; Friedel, J.K.; Stahr, K. Review of mechanisms and quantification of priming effects. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2000, 32, 1485–1494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Watson, C.A.; Atkinson, D.; Gosling, P.; Jackson, L.R.; Rayns, F.W. Managing soil fertility in organic farming systems. Soil Use Manag. 2002, 18, 239–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Cordovil, C.D.S.; Coutinho, J.; Goss, M.; Cabral, F. Potentially mineralizable nitrogen from organic materials applied to a sandy soil: Fitting the one-pool exponential model. Soil Use Manag. 2005, 21, 65–72. [Google Scholar]
  44. Antille, D.L.; Sakrabani, R.; Godwin, R.J. Effects of biosolids-derived organomineral fertilizers, urea, and biosolids granules on crop and soil established with ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.). Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2014, 45, 1605–1621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Vaneeckhaute, C.; Janda, J.; Vanrolleghem, P.A.; Tack, F.M.G.; Meers, E. Phosphorus use efficiency of bio-based fertilizers: Bioavailability and fractionation. Pedosphere 2016, 26, 310–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Castán, E.; Satti, P.; González-Polo, M.; Iglesias, M.C.; Mazzarino, M.J. Managing the value of compost as organic amendments and fertilizers. Agrosyst. Geosci. Environ. 2016, 224, 29–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Mumbach, G.L.; Gatiboni, L.C.; de Bona, F.D.; Schmitt, D.E.; Correa, J.C.; Gabriel, C.A.; Dall’Orsoletta, D.J.; Iochims, D.A. Agronomic efficiency of organomineral fertilizer in sequential grain crops in southern Brazil. Agron. J. 2020, 112, 3037–3049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Sitzmann, T.J.; Alpigiano, A.; Lerda, C.; Moretti, B.; Zavattaro, L.; Grignani, C. Response of tomato to innovative organo-mineral fertilizers. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2024, 8, 1385828. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sitzmann, T.J.; Sica, P.; Zavattaro, L.; Moretti, B.; Grignani, C.; Oberson, A. An isotope study on nitrogen and phosphorus use efficiency and movement in soil in a mimicked vermicompost-based organo-mineral fertilizer. Agrosyst. Geosci. Environ. 2024, 7, e20473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Deeks, L.K.; Chaney, K.; Murray, C.; Sakrabani, R.; Gedara, S.; Le, M.S.; Tyrrel, S.; Pawlett, M.; Read, R.; Smith, G.H. A new sludge-derived organo-mineral fertilizer gives similar crop yields as conventional fertilizers. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2013, 33, 539–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Florio, A.; Felici, B.; Migliore, M.; Dell’Abate, M.T.; Benedetti, A. Nitrogen losses, uptake and abundance of ammonia oxidizers in soil under mineral and organo-mineral fertilization regimes. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2016, 96, 2440–2450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Shi, W.; Bian, R.; Li, L.; Lian, W.; Liu, X.; Zheng, J.; Cheng, K.; Zhang, X.; Drosos, M.; Joseph, S.; et al. Assessing the impacts of biochar-blended urea on nitrogen use efficiency and soil retention in wheat production. GCB Bioenergy 2021, 14, 65–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Uddin, M.K.; Yeasmin, S.; Mohiuddin, K.M.; Chowdhury, M.A.H.; Saha, B.K. Peat-Based Organo-Mineral Fertilizer Improves Nitrogen Use Efficiency, Soil Quality, and Yield of Baby Corn (Zea mays L.). Sustainability 2023, 15, 9086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Richards, J.E.; Daigle, J.-Y.; LeBlanc, P.; Paulin, R.; Ghanem, I. Nitrogen availability and nitrate leaching from organo-mineral fertilizers. Can. J. Soil Sci. 1993, 73, 197–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Pampuro, N.; Bertora, C.; Sacco, D.; Dinuccio, E.; Grignani, C.; Balsari, P.; Bernal, M.P. Fertilizer value and greenhouse gas emissions from solid fraction pig slurry compost pellets. J. Agric. Sci. 2017, 155, 1646–1658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Gram, G.; Roobroeck, D.; Pypers, P.; Six, J.; Merckx, R.; Vanlauwe, B. Combining organic and mineral fertilizers as a climate-smart integrated soil fertility management practice in sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0239552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Allam, M.; Radicetti, E.; Quintarelli, V.; Petroselli, V.; Marinari, S.; Mancinelli, R. Influence of organic and mineral fertilizers on soil organic carbon and crop productivity under different tillage systems: A meta-analysis. Agriculture 2022, 12, 464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Antille, D.L.; Sakrabani, R.; Godwin, R.J. Nitrogen release characteristics from biosolids-derived organomineral fertilizers. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2014, 45, 1687–1698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Valentine, J.; Charles, A.H. The association of dry-matter yield with nitrogen and soluble-carbohydrate concentration in perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.). J. Agric. Sci. 1979, 93, 657–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Alvarez-Alonso, C.; Clemente, R.; Bernal, M.P. Carbon and nitrogen mineralisation in soils and nutrient efficiency of digestates from fruits and vegetable wastes. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2022, 22, 4473–4486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Yin, M.; Li, Y.; Hu, Q.; Yu, X.; Huang, M.; Zhao, J.; Dong, S.; Yuan, X.; Wen, Y. Potassium increases nitrogen and potassium utilization efficiency and yield in foxtail millet. Agronomy 2023, 13, 2200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Agronomy 15 00579 g001
Figure 1. Uptake dynamics: (a) N, P, and K uptake during the experiment: 10-, 25-, and 40-day sampling. (b) Cumulative uptake: N, P, and K. The dashed red line indicates cumulative uptake in the control. See Table 1 for acronyms. Different letters within a column indicate significant differences between treatments (p < 0.05).
Figure 1. Uptake dynamics: (a) N, P, and K uptake during the experiment: 10-, 25-, and 40-day sampling. (b) Cumulative uptake: N, P, and K. The dashed red line indicates cumulative uptake in the control. See Table 1 for acronyms. Different letters within a column indicate significant differences between treatments (p < 0.05).
Agronomy 15 00579 g001
Agronomy 15 00579 g002
Figure 2. Accumulated fresh and dry biomass during ryegrass growth. The dashed red line indicates the control plants’ biomass. See Table 1 for acronyms. Different letters within a column indicate significant differences between treatments (p < 0.05).
Figure 2. Accumulated fresh and dry biomass during ryegrass growth. The dashed red line indicates the control plants’ biomass. See Table 1 for acronyms. Different letters within a column indicate significant differences between treatments (p < 0.05).
Agronomy 15 00579 g002
Table 1. Fertiliser treatments that were evaluated in the potted ryegrass crop.
Table 1. Fertiliser treatments that were evaluated in the potted ryegrass crop.
Fertiliser ClassTreatmentsAcronym
ReferenceControlC
SyntheticComplex (15-15-15)IN
SyntheticMonoammonium phosphate (11-61-0)MAP
Simple mineralStruvite (5-33-0)STR
Simple organicBone meal (3-30-0)BON
Pellet mineralMonoammonium phosphate + compostOMF-MAP
Pellet mineralStruvite + compostOMF-STR
Pellet organicBone meal + compostOMF-BON
Table 2. Physico-chemical characteristics of the compost used as the OMF base.
Table 2. Physico-chemical characteristics of the compost used as the OMF base.
Parameter aUnitOMWC
pH-8.86 ± 0.01
Electrical conductivity(dS m−1)3.42 ± 0.08
Organic matter(%)73.6 ± 0.8
Total organic C(g kg−1)419 ± 0.5
Total N(g kg−1)27.1 ± 0.1
Total organic C/Total N-15.5 ± 0.2
Polyphenols(mg kg−1)1456 ± 68
P(g kg−1)6.73 ± 0.82
K(g kg−1)26 ± 0.3
Ca(g kg−1)29.6 ± 0.2
Mg(mg kg−1)3.95 ± 0.04
Na(g kg−1)1.09 ± 0.01
S(g kg−1)3.55 ± 0.04
Fe(mg kg−1)2643 ± 338
Mn(mg kg−1)297 ± 33.0
Cu(mg kg−1)112 ± 9.0
Zn(mg kg−1)227 ± 23.0
a Values on a dry matter basis. Values reported as mean ± standard error (n = 3).
Table 3. Composition of organo-mineral fertilisers (OMFs) enriched with phosphorus (OMF + P).
Table 3. Composition of organo-mineral fertilisers (OMFs) enriched with phosphorus (OMF + P).
Parameter aOMF-MAPOMF-STROMF-BON
pH5.59 ± 1.616.68 ± 1.638.63 ± 1.70
EC (dS m−1)3.02 ± 2.953.88 ± 1.781.88 ± 7.60
TOC (g kg−1)216 ± 1.50179 ± 0.40294 ± 3.17
TN (g kg−1)71 ± 0.6037 ± 0.1028 ± 0.20
P (g kg−1)179 ± 5.1073 ± 1.6246 ± 4.31
K (g kg−1)14.4 ± 0.2311.9 ± 0.0615.7 ± 1.60
Na (g kg−1)0.61 ± 0.012.18 ± 0.002.80 ± 2.80
S (g kg−1)2.62 ± 3.173.33 ± 0.013.32 ± 0.33
Ca (g kg−1)19.8 ± 0.4053.3 ± 0.07115 ± 12.3
Mg (g kg−1)2.25 ± 0.0121.1 ± 3.424.05 ± 0.46
Fe (g kg−1)1176 ± 13.04173 ± 78.01122 ± 17.0
Mn (mg kg−1)158 ± 12.0271 ± 3.00165 ± 16.0
Cu (mg kg−1)51 ± 3.3051 ± 0.3052 ± 5.20
Zn (mg kg−1)119 ± 0.50183 ± 2.10167 ± 15
a Values on a dry matter basis. Values reported as mean ± standard error (n = 3). See Table 1 for acronyms.
Table 4. Physical-chemical soil properties at ryegrass harvest.
Table 4. Physical-chemical soil properties at ryegrass harvest.
TreatmentpHECOMC StockTNNH4+-NNO3−-NPext
(dS cm−1)(%)(kg ha−1)(g kg−1)(mg kg−1)(mg kg−1)(mg kg−1)
C7.85 b3.17 a0.60 a66.6 a0.36 a3.71 a3.34 a80 a
IN7.68 a3.19 a0.69 d78.2 e0.41 b8.43 b16.0 b127 b
MAP7.80 b3.39 c0.69 d75.9 e0.36 a13.8 c39.1 d178 c
STR7.84 b3.21 a0.62 ab68.7 ab0.35 a14.6 c30.1 c90 a
BON7.82 b3.39 c0.64 b70.5 bc0.33 a9.65 b42.9 de121 b
OMF-MAP7.84 b3.36 c0.67 cd74.2 de0.35 a13.8 c59.0 f177 c
OMF-STR7.84 b3.24 ab0.68 cd74.9 de0.36 a20.0 d59.4 f115 b
OMF-BON7.89 b3.33 bc0.65 bc72.2 cd0.36 a20.8 d44.7 e116 b
F-ANOVA3.53 *8.02 ***9.22 ***9.56 ***3.38 *32.7 ***240 ***11.7 ***
EC: electrical conductivity; OM: organic matter; TN: total nitrogen Kjeldahl N; NH4+-N: ammonium; NO3−-N: nitrate. Pext: extractable phosphorus. *, ***: significant difference between treatments at p < 0.01 and p < 0.0001, respectively. Different letters within a column indicate significant differences between treatments (p < 0.05). Values indicate mean (n = 3). See Table 1 for acronyms.
Table 5. Nutrient use efficiency of the fertilisation treatments.
Table 5. Nutrient use efficiency of the fertilisation treatments.
TreatmentNUEPUEKUE
(%)(%)(%)
IN57.64 b3.96 b36.8 d
MAP68.80 c5.49 d13.3 c
STR70.23 c4.18 bc12.9 c
BON55.52 b0.42 a10.6 b
OMF-MAP54.37 b3.81 b9.90 b
OMF-STR57.59 b4.73 c10.1 b
OMF-BON41.71 a0.00 a7.39 a
F-ANOVA17 ***133 ***299 ***
NUE/PUE/KUE: nitrogen/phosphorus/potassium use efficiency. ***: significant difference between treatments at p < 0.0001. Different letters within a column indicate significant differences between treatments (p < 0.05). Values indicate mean (n = 3). See Table 1 for acronyms.
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

Sánchez-Méndez, S.; Valverde-Vozmediano, L.; Orden, L.; Andreu-Rodríguez, F.J.; Sáez-Tovar, J.A.; Martínez-Sabater, E.; Bustamante, M.Á.; Moral, R. Alternative Phosphorus Fertilisation with Bio-Based Pellet Fertilisers: A Case of Study on Ryegrass (Lollium perenne L.). Agronomy 2025, 15, 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15030579

AMA Style

Sánchez-Méndez S, Valverde-Vozmediano L, Orden L, Andreu-Rodríguez FJ, Sáez-Tovar JA, Martínez-Sabater E, Bustamante MÁ, Moral R. Alternative Phosphorus Fertilisation with Bio-Based Pellet Fertilisers: A Case of Study on Ryegrass (Lollium perenne L.). Agronomy. 2025; 15(3):579. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15030579

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sánchez-Méndez, Silvia, Lucía Valverde-Vozmediano, Luciano Orden, Francisco Javier Andreu-Rodríguez, José Antonio Sáez-Tovar, Encarnación Martínez-Sabater, María Ángeles Bustamante, and Raúl Moral. 2025. "Alternative Phosphorus Fertilisation with Bio-Based Pellet Fertilisers: A Case of Study on Ryegrass (Lollium perenne L.)" Agronomy 15, no. 3: 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15030579

APA Style

Sánchez-Méndez, S., Valverde-Vozmediano, L., Orden, L., Andreu-Rodríguez, F. J., Sáez-Tovar, J. A., Martínez-Sabater, E., Bustamante, M. Á., & Moral, R. (2025). Alternative Phosphorus Fertilisation with Bio-Based Pellet Fertilisers: A Case of Study on Ryegrass (Lollium perenne L.). Agronomy, 15(3), 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15030579

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