Amend the soil with organic processing wastes or their composts

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 2
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

58%
Certainty

35%
Harms

20%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

Cotton gin compost is compost made from the stalks, leaves and seed pods of cotton plants. These are discarded as ‘gin waste,’ hence the name. Soil aggregates are groups of soil particles that bind to each other more strongly than to adjacent particles. Aggregate stability is the ability of soil aggregates to resist disintegration when disruptive forces associated with tillage and water or wind erosion are applied.

Study locations

Key messages

Two controlled, replicated trials from Spain and the United Kingdom (one also randomized) measured the effect of adding composts to soil. One trial found applying high rates of cotton gin compost and poultry manure improved soil structure and reduced soil loss, but increased nutrient loss. One trial found improved nutrient retention and increased barley Hordeum vulgare yield when molasses were added.

SOIL TYPES COVERED: sandy-clay, sandy loam, silty-clay.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A controlled, randomized, replicated experiment in 2001-2004 on silty- and sandy-clay soils in Seville, Spain (Tejada & Gonzalez, 2008) found that high application rates (7,120 kg/ha/year) of both crushed cotton gin compost and poultry manure reduced soil aggregate instability (see background section) (by 21% and 18%, respectively), soil density (20% and 17%) and soil loss (29% and 25%) compared to the control treatment. Nutrient loss was higher in water from amended soils (19 mg organic carbon/l for cotton compost and 22 mg/l for poultry manure) than the control soil (0 mg/l). Lower application rates of cotton compost and poultry manure also reduced soil instability, soil loss and nutrient loss, but to a lesser extent. There were four replicates of five treatments: untreated soil, cotton compost applied at 3,560 kg organic matter/ha/year, cotton compost at 7,120 kg/ha/yr, poultry manure at 3,560 kg/ha/year, and poultry manure at 7,120 kg/ha/year. Soil samples were collected from each plot to 25 cm depth.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Tejada M. & Gonzalez J.L. (2008) Influence of two organic amendments on the soil physical properties, soil losses, sediments and runoff water quality. Geoderma, 145, 325-334.
A replicated, controlled study in 2000 on sandy loam soil in Wellesbourne, United Kingdom (Rahn et al. 2009) found that adding sugar beet Beta vulgaris tops with molasses to a barley Hordeum vulgare crop increased soil mineral nitrogen by 46% and yield by 32%, compared to no addition. Adding paper waste with sugar beet tops did not affect soil mineral nitrogen but improved yield by 23%. Amendments were applied at 3.2-3.8 t/ha, including compactor (machine which compresses waste material to reduce the space it takes up) and paper waste from the recycling industry, recently-harvested wheat Triticum aestivum straw, compost from municipal green waste, and liquid molasses (thick brown, uncrystallized juice from raw sugar) from the sugar refining industry. Amendments were applied with 42 t/ha sugar beet tops.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Rahn C.R., Bending G.D., Lillywhite R.D. & Turner M.K. (2009) Co-incorporation of biodegradable wastes with crop residues to reduce nitrate pollution of groundwater and decrease waste disposal to landfill. Soil Use and Management, 25, 113-123.

Please cite as:

Key, G., Whitfield, M., Dicks, L.V., Sutherland, W.J. & Bardgett, R.D. (2020) Enhancing Soil Fertility. Pages 613-634 in: W.J. Sutherland, L.V. Dicks, S.O. Petrovan & R.K. Smith (eds) What Works in Conservation 2020. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Soil Fertility

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Amend the soil using a mix of organic and inorganic amendments Action Link	Beneficial	11	Synopsis Link
Change the timing of manure application Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	1	Synopsis Link
Amend the soil with non-chemical minerals and mineral wastes Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	2	Synopsis Link