How to build soil Organic Matter using soil amendments and cover crops.

1. What’s the Best Fit?

2. Organic Amendment Options
Outline:
• Why do we need organic amendments?
• How can organic amendments help soil?
• Synergies with other practices?
• How much can we afford to pay for amendments?
• What amendments are available?
• Opportunities?

3. Why do we need Organic Amendments?

4. Organic Matter In Ontario Soils (2002 - 2016)
Data courtesy of Jack Legg – SGS Agri-Food Labs
Compiled by Christine Brown – OMAFRA Jan 2017
• Ranges from 12,300 to 23,100 total samples/year – all Ontario
• Samples are not from the same locations every year
• Clay soils will have a higher SOM level than sandy soils
• Livestock farms will have a higher SOM level than cash-crop farms
• Research projects and grid sampling are included in this data set
and can “skew” the data for 1 year
• Organic (muck) soils are included in this data set
• Unrealistic county averages (e.g., 23% for York) were left out

5. R² = 0.2576
3.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
5.00
5.50
6.00
6.50
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
SoilOrganicMatter%
Year
Change in Soil Organic Matter from 2002 to 2016
All Ontario compared to Carleton, Prescott/Russell
Carleton/Prescott-Russell
All Ontario
Eastern Ontario :
Crop history = more livestock/forage-
based and less soybeans

6. 3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
10.00
2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
SoilOrganicMatter%
Year
Change in Soil Organic Matter from 2002 to 2016
All Ontario compared to Carleton/Prescott Russell and Stormont/Dundas/Glengarry
Carleton/Prescott-Russell
All Ontario
Stormont/Dundas/Glengarry

8. How much yield gives enough residue to maintain SOM levels?

9. Comparison of Approximate Crop Yields Required to Maintain 3% SOM
Crop Crop Residue
lbs/ac1
Root Biomass
lbs/ac1
Stable OM from
crop biomass
(lbs/bu yield)
Yield to maintain 3% SOM
(1,800 lbs/ac OM) estimated
Crop residue Crop residue + Root Biomass
Corn 12,000 1,500 11.1 162 bu/ac 142 bu/ac
Wheat 5,000 2,000 11.7 153 bu/ac 92 bu/ac
Soybeans 2,400 750 7.8 230 bu/ac 158 bu/ac
1 Source: Dale Cowan (AgriFood Lab info sheets) assumes 180 bu corn, 80 bu wheat and 45 bu/ac soy yield
Assumptions:
Soil organic matter level 3.0% goal
~ 3% of the SOM decomposes each year
2,000,000 lbs in surface 6 inches of soil/acre
2,000,000 x 0.03 = 60,000 lbs SOM/acre x 0.03/yr decomposition
= 1,800 lbs/ac lost by decomposition that needs to be replaced

10. Comparison of Approximate Crop Yields Required to Maintain 3% Soil Organic Matter
Crop Yield to Maintain 3% SOM (1,800 lbs/ac OM) estimated
Crop residue Crop residue + Root Biomass
Corn 162 bu/ac 142 bu/ac
Wheat 153 bu/ac 92 bu/ac
Soybeans 230 bu/ac 158 bu/ac
Example Crop Yields: Corn 200 bu/ac – Soy 50 bu/ac – Wheat 100 bu/ac
Impact of Soybeans in Rotation for Maintaining SOM
Rotation
Yield
(combined bu/ac)
Yield needed for SOM
(combined bu/ac)
Yield Balance/Rotation
Bu/ac
Soys-Soys-Soys 150 474 - 324
Corn-Soy-Wheat 350 392 - 42
Corn-Corn-Soy 450 442 + 8
Corn-Corn-Soy-Wheat 550 532 + 16
Corn-Soy-Soy 300 458 - 158
Wheat-Corn-Soy-Soy 400 550 - 100

11. Residue
Management
Cover Crops
Organic
Amendments
Steps to Maximum Soil Health
Rotation
Reduced
Tillage

12. Organic Amendment Synergy
Cover Crops without digestate Cover Crops with digestate
- More top growth and root biomass

13. sugars
cellulose
proteins
hemicellulose
polyphenols
lignin
humus
Cover crops
Digestate
Manure/Biosolids
Compost
Different Amendments provide Different
Benefits to Soil

14. Diversity benefits the soil
sugars
cellulose
proteins
hemicellulose
polyphenols
lignin
humus
Bacteria
Actinomycetes
Fungi
Cover crops

15. Approximate Biomass Yield of Three Cover Crop Mixes with and without
Organic Amendments
Cover Crop
With Manure Without Manure Increase
from manure
Approximate Yield (ton/ac)*
Oats
3.6 2.8 33 %
Multi-Species Mix: Planted at 40 lbs/ac
33% Oats, 4% Nitro radish, 2% Brassica, 2%
Sorghum Sudangrass, 1% Phacelia, 2%
Sunflowers, 4% Sun hemp, 5% Turnips, 25%
Crimson Clover, 23% Austrian Peas
2.10 1.75 17 %
3 Species Mix: Planted at 30 lbs/ac
14% Nitro Radish, 16% Crimson Clover, 70% Oats
2.85 1.83 36 %
* biomass yield that includes top-growth and comparative root mass
The above data represents one site –one year
3,500 gal/ac digestate was applied in mid-August. Nutrient composition of digestate is similar
to hog manure.

16. EXAMPLE: 2016 Cover Crops Oats with and without digestate
Cover crop and Digestate Plots (harvested Oct 13, 2016)
Yield Yield & Quality *
Treatment
(ave of 18 samples)
Dry Weight
(t/ac) % Δ Milk/ton Milk/ac $$/acre
CC Oat 1.91 --- 1,985 2,997 $1,030
Digestate + CC Oat 3.24 41.2 1,916 6,312 $2,168
*using Wisconsin MILK2013 and milk value = $0.78/L
Organic Amendment Synergy = $$
Economic opportunities with cover crops and organic amendments

17. EXAMPLE: 2016 Cover Crops Oats with and without digestate
Above ground
biomass only
OM
(lbs/acre)
P205
Uptake/removal
K20
uptake/removal
CC Oat 3,514 21 lbs/ac P205 97 lbs/ac K20
Digestate + CC Oat 5,861 42 lbs/ac P205 231 lbs K20/acre
SOM
Stable Carbon
(lbs/ac)
% Δ in SOM
Above ground only
Years to ↑ SOM by 1%
Above ground only
+ Root
Biomass
(estimate)**
Digestate only 101 0.005 200 200 yrs
CC Oat 422 0.02 47 26 yrs
Digestate + CC Oat 823 0.04 24 15 yrs
** 1,685 lbs/acre (6” depth) of carbon from 8 wk oat growth (J. Environ Qual 30:1911-1918 (2001))
Organic Amendment Synergy = $$
Economic opportunities with cover crops and organic amendments
If biomass was returned to the soil:

18. Amendment Type
Total N
(lbs/ton)
C:N
ratio
Application
rate (ton/ac)
Stable C
(lb/ton)
% SOM
increase
1% ↑
SOM
(applicatons)
N - P205 - K20 (lbs/ac)*
(available)
High C:N dairy 6 lbs 49 340 19,992 1.0 1 327 – 625 - 1,179
High C:N dairy 6 49 150 8,820 0.44 2.3 145 - 276 – 520
Mushroom compost 24.8 10 400 99,200 1.0 1 3,143 - 5,000 - 9,390
Mushroom compost 24.8 10 25 1,240 0.062 16 196 – 313 - 587
Solid Dairy manure 18.32 16 341 19,991 1.0 1 1,160 - 3,600 - 6,900
Solid Dairy manure 18.32 16 32 1,875 0.094 10.6 109 – 338 – 650
Leaf/yard compost 19.6 17 300 19,992 1.0 1 1,808 - 2,315 - 3,445
Leaf/yard compost 19.6 17 34 2,266 0.113 8.8 204 - 263 – 390
Solid Horse manure 10 30 333 19,980 1.0 1 801 - 1,836 - 3,103
Solid Horse manure 10 30 62 3,720 0.186 5.4 149 - 342 - 578
*NMAN3 data using average database nutrient values for application 1 x per 3 years for a 180 bu corn crop
Materials are not created equally – Need to know the nutrient and OM, C:N ratio of
the materials being considered.
Organic Amendments: Nutrients or Organic Matter?
How long does it take and how much material is required to raise Soil Organic Matter by ~1%

19. Sources of Organic Matter
(& Nutrients)
• Cover crops
• Manure
• Biosolids
• Biosolids Pellets
• N-Viro
• Biochar
• Digestate
• Lystegro
• Compost (manure & municipal)

22. There is a wide range in cost of the materials. The price is determined mainly by distance
transported, application and volume (bulk density).
Biosolids:
Terratec Environmental - Mark Janiec 905-878-2800 x223 mjaniec@terratecenvironmental.com
WESSUC - Adrian Tod - 1-519 -752-0837 adrian.tod@wessuc.com
Processed Biosolids Pellets: David Buurma 519-671-2534 roger.buurma@gmail.com
Veolia Water Canada Inc.- Paul Purser 905-906-1292 paul.purser@veolia.com www.nutri-pel.ca
N-Viro – Ian Shipley 519-786-2106 or Lise LeBlanc 519-410-3228 lise.leblanc@n-viro.ca
Lystegro – Michael Dougherty 519-923-3539 mdougherty@lystek.com www.lystek.com
Municipal Compost:
AIM Environmental Group – Hamilton/Guelph – Frank Peters fpeters@aimgroup.ca or
Mike Lishman 289-260-6820 arlington.farms@live.com
MILLER Compost – Kyle Schumacher – 905-426-4222x232 kyle.schumacher@millergroup.ca
ORGA - London Municipal Greenbin Compost – Chris O’Toole 519-649-4446 x 106 cotoole@orgaworld.ca
Ottawa Municipal Greenbin Compost - 613-822-2056
Peel Region Compost – Terry DiNatale 905-791-7800 x7963 - terry.dinatale@peelregion.ca
TRY Recycling (compost) – Rick Vandersluis – 519-858-2199 rick.vandersluis@tryrecycling.com
Walker Environmental – Diana Aquino 905-329-4285 daquino@walkerind.com www.walkerind.com
Municipal Digestate:
Cornerstone Renewables – Travis Woolings 519-317-6756 twoollings@rogers.com
Manure/Compost Brokers:
M.P. Agri-Products Ted Empey 519-765-4535 mpagriproducts@auracom.com
Organix Matters – Scott Boldt 519-389-2888 organixmatters@bmts.co

23. Livestock Manure (Solid)
What Is It?
• Livestock waste with bedding materials (straw, wood chips etc.)
Benefits:
• Available on-farm (livestock neighbours?)
• provides many of the required macro and micro nutrients
• supplies organic matter which will help maintain or improve soil health
Challenges:
• contains odours and pathogens which,
– can lead to water contamination
• application to wet soils
– can cause soil compaction.
• Nutrient content
– usually not in proportions needed by crops
• Application to crops further from manure storage
– takes time and planning

24. Manure Has Value
Animal Type
DM
%
Useable N1
lbs
P205
2
lbs
K20
lbs
Year 1 Value
$
Year 2-4 Value3
$
Liquid Hog /1000 gal 4 22 11 21 28.80 7.80
Liquid Dairy /1000 gal 8 17 8 27 26.70 7.40
Solid Cattle /ton 30 4.5 5.3 14 12.00 4.60
Poultry layers /ton 37 20 18 21 32.20 13.80
Poultry broilers/ton 66 25 26 39 47.30 20.90
Sheep /ton 32 6 6.3 16 14.50 5.00
Horses /ton 37 2.4 2.8 9 7.10 2.60
Spring applied; incorporated; 40% P in application year; Organic N and 40% P in yr 2-4
Are there opportunities to move/sell manure to fields with higher fertility needs?
http://fieldcropnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Nutrient-Value-of-Manure.pdf

25. Compost (manure)
What Is It?
• Material with specific C:N ratio and moisture content that goes through a
process of heating, turning and curing provides nutrients and organic
matter with reduced volume and odour compared to the original material
Benefits:
• provides many of the required macro and micro nutrients (ration based)
• Low odour and pathogen content
• Low risk of nitrogen loss (leaching or volatilzation)
• supplies organic matter which will help maintain or improve soil health
Challenges:
• Higher labour requirement than with manure
• Could have odour issues if C:N ratio or
moisture content is too high or low

26. Municipal Compost
What Is It?
• Municipal good waste mixed with high carbon materials (ie wood
chips) and composted in-vessel, or in windrows, under specific
conditions to meet MOE un-restricted compost guidelines
• Analysis will vary for each facility, depends on process and length
of curing.
Benefits:
• High OM product with good balance of available N-P-K and micro
nutrients. (Varies with inputs i.e. food waste v.s. leaf-yard waste)
• Cured compost = low odour & low risk of N loss
• Uniform application is easier than with most solid manure types
• Ideally applied once in the rotation (after cereal harvest) at ~10-15
ton/acre

27. Municipal Greenbin Compost
Challenges:
• Low bulk density as low as 20 lbs/cubic foot, makes transport expensive
• Contaminants – plastics
• Maturity – could result in class B compost = NASM 3 = more work
• Odour - Un-cured or green compost can have a distinct odour that re-
occurs when wetted if material is not incorporated
• Temporary field storage can cause some compaction damage
• Timing of product availability and application
• Some variability in product – time of year input availability
• Un-incorporated, surface applied = soluble P runoff risk ?

28. Compost Study - Yield/Quality Results 2011-2015

29. AIM Hamilton Try Recycling Compost
Analysis Available (lbs/ton) Analysis Available (lbs/ton)
Dry Matter % 72 1,532 61.7 1,234
Total Nitrogen % 2.4
19.5 + 3.8 = ~20
0.98
5.8 + 0.2 = ~5
NH4-N (ppm) 2541 142
Phosphorus % 0.62 22.7 (P205) 0.21 7.7 (P205)
Potassium % 1.25 27 (K20) 0.53 11.4 (K20)
Organic Matter % 50.1 720* 30.2 373*
pH 6.60 8.10
C:N ratio 12 : 1 17 : 1
Bulk Density 329 kg/m3 20.5 lbs/ft3 596 kg/m3 37.2 lbs/ft3
Sulphur (ppm) 2373 4.7 1171 2.3
EC (conductivity) (ms/cm) 9.81 12.6 3.15 4.0
Sodium % 0.62 12.4 0.07 1.4
Aluminum (ppm) 1458 2.9 2183 4.4
Boron (ppm) 15.1 0.03 15 0.03
Calcium (%) 3.28 66 3.70 74
Copper (ppm) 31.6 0.06 35.5 0.07
Iron (ppm) 2775 5.6 5644 11.3
Magnesium (%) 0.39 7.8 0.79 15.8
Manganese (ppm) 134.2 0.27 219.2 0.44
Zinc (ppm) 94.6 0.18 251.0 0.50
* ~20% of OM is assumed stable
Knowing Material Composition is Important

30. BiocharWhat is It?
• Black carbon material produced from a thermochemical process (pyrolysis) of
organic feedstocks
• Stable, inert material that can adsorb nutrients and increase nutrient retention
without carbon release to atmosphere
Benefits:
• Increases water holding capacity when applied at high rates
• Yield response to biochar when added to fall applied liquid manure:
– Viscosity (thickness) increased
– Provides odour control
– benefit from immobilization of NH4-N & NO3-N to slow release / could ↓ N loss
Challenges:
• Soil applied (without manure) - little impact on biomass grain yield
• Difficult to handle and apply in a practical operation
• Composition influenced by feedstock and manufacturing conditions
• Supply driven by energy industry (carbon offsets) -limited Ontario supply

31. Biosolids
What Is It?
• Dried & dewatered sewage biosolids
• Pulp & paper waste
• Processing waste
Benefits:
• similar to manure from nutrient and organic matter perspective
• custom applied and applied at no cost for the farm (usually)
• regulatory changes in 2010 - application rates set to meet crop needs
Challenges:
• Sewage biosolids contain little or no potash
• contain trace elements (ie lead, copper)
• wider setbacks are required from residences and sensitive features
• setback areas = additional trip with commercial fertilizer
• regulatory requirements – NASM plan required pre-application

32. N-Viro
What Is It?
• Biosolids material processed with kiln dust to provide liming benefit
• Regulated through CFIA - treated as a fertilizer material
Benefits:
• high calcium and potassium = liming capacity
• relatively high sulphur content
• ideal product for sandy soils with low pH
• regulated through CFIA = product consistency and no need for NASM plan
Challenges:
• nitrogen contribution and organic matter is relatively low.
• N-Viro is dusty and should be applied under low wind conditions

33. Biosolids PelletsWhat Are They?
• Process takes digested sewage to biosolids cake (dewatered, thickening agents
added) then pelletization (heating and drying) process occurs
• Regulated through CFIA - treated as a fertilizer
Benefits:
• excellent source of organic matter, nitrogen, phosphorus and micro-nutrients
• Regulated through CFIA = product consistency and no need for NASM plan
• processed biosolids pellets are available from Windsor, Detroit and Toronto
and are similar in nutrient content
Challenges:
• Low K = not the product of choice if potash is an important requirement
• Can heat and ignite in storage
• Water treatment processes result in differences in aluminum, calcium, iron
levels which could affect phosphorus availability, especially in low pH soils
• Pellets application rate restricted to meet heavy metals limits (~1 T/ha for
Toronto pellets)

34. Label (guaranteed analysis) v.s. “real analysis”
Label: 4.6 – 6.0 - 0
Actual: 5.0 – 6.7 – 0
Available: 2.6 -5.3 - 0

35. Lystegro
What Is It?
• Regulated through CFIA - treated as a fertilizer material
• Patented process that combines sewage biosolids + potassium
hydroxide + heat (70 °C) + a lysing process
Benefits:
• 14-15% dry matter
• ~ 50 – 35 – 20 lbs/1000 gal of available N-P205-K20 in year of application
• relatively high sulphur (~14 lbs) and high organic matter (> 500 lbs) content
• regulated through CFIA = product consistency - no need for NASM plan
• Custom applied
Challenges:
• Ideal rate between 3,000 – 3,500 gal/ac for corn
• High pH, high NH4-N = high volatilization risk
• Requires immediate incorporation or injection

36. Label (guaranteed analysis) v.s. “real analysis”
Label: 3 – 3 – 2
Actual: 6 – 7 – 2
73.31
51.12
88.38
35.35
23.25
20.93
6.27
3.65

37. Anaerobic Digestate
What Is It?
• By-product of anaerobic digesters – main program for GHG
• Composition will vary with inputs – testing is important
• Opportunity for liquid solid separation – further composting
Benefits:
• Higher N & lower C:N ratio compared to pre-AD
• Spring application to growing crops is ideal
• odour and pathogens lower (closed system)
• Liquid application can be difficult if ↑ N content
Challenges:
• ↑ NH4-N and ↓C:N ratio – similar composition to liquid hog manure
• Higher risk = more management
– Application rate, uniformity, timing is more important
– ↑pH, ↑ NH4-N – Higher risk of volatilization & leaching

38. R² = 0.8138
R² = 0.8001
R² = 0.8277
R² = 0.8265
-200
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
DosimeterReadings(ppm/hr)
Hours After Application
Comparing Ammonia Loss Trends – Injected and Surface Applied Manure
to Digestate
check
injected digestate
surface digestate
surface manure
injected manure
Surface Applied Digestate
Surface Applied Manure
Injected Digestate
Injected Manure

39. 75
95
115
135
155
175
195
Riverview Shelbourne New Lowell Meaford Average
Yield(bu/acre)
75
95
115
135
155
175
195
215
235
Riverview Dundalk Elora Meaford Stayner Average
Yield(bu/acre)
4,500 gal/ac
3,000 gal/ac
N-P-K equivalent
2015 Wet Summer
Average:
16 bu/ac ↑ yield
2016 – Dry Summer
Average:
1 bu/ac ↑ yield
Lystegro Field Trials (2015-16)
Georgian Region S & C project
? Soil Test
P = 3 ppm
K = 17 ppm

40. 75
95
115
135
155
175
195
Riverview Shelbourne New Lowell Meaford Average
Yield(bu/acre) Lystegro Field Trials (2015-16)
? Soil Test
P = 3 ppm
K = 17 ppm
Approximate Nutrients Applied (lbs/ac N - P205 - K20)
Fertilizer check 127 – 92 – 143
3,000 gal/ac 101 – 131 ̶ 106
4,500 gal/ac 151 – 197 – 118
Recommendation
110 lbs P205
160 lb/ac K20

41. D = Digestate ( BioEn - Elmira)
B = Processed Biosolids (Lystegro)
4R Application of Organic Amendments Small Plot Study
Don King, Ann Huber - SRG
R² = 0.7606
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85
cornyield(bu/acre)
Initial + added K (ppm in soil)
K "total vs yield
60-80 ppm K
Recommendation: 80 lbs/ac K
Applied:
Digestate: 22 lbs/ac
Lystgro: 41 lbs/ac

42. D = Digestate ( BioEn - Elmira)
B = Processed Biosolids (Lystegro)
4R Application of Organic Amendments Small Plot Study
Don King, Ann Huber - SRG
R² = 0.7606
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85
cornyield(bu/acre)
Initial + added K (ppm in soil)
K "total vs yield
Critical Level = 1.20 %
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
Dni Bni D-0 B-0 0+N D+N B+N check
K(%)
Corn leaf tissue %K

43. Opportunities with Organic Amendments
Issues:
• municipal organics production - daily
• application –
o limited to growing season
o no application when soils are frozen or snow covered.
• Storage of liquids is expensive
• Storage of solids (temporary field storage options)
• Solids have lower environmental risk
Opportunities: Mixing materials to match needs
• Examples:
↑carbon solid + ↑ N liquid = ↑ nutrient concentration
= ↑ marketability to agriculture
(e.g. digestate mixed with leaf-yard based compost)
• match nutrient needs vs organic matter
• match products to where they have greatest benefit

44. Opportunities with Organic Amendments
• Marketing to agriculture
• Example immature compost – as a potential market
• Mixing products to match niche markets
• Government initiatives
• Soil Health (GLASI funding for adding OM)
• Lake Erie phosphorus reduction
• Climate Change
• Improving logistics
• Shared transportation? Improved efficiency?
• Working with fertilizer industry
• 4R initiative
• Storage/ marketing/application opportunities for
“August-October” applications with cover crops

45. Summary:
• Ontario soils at risk for erosion, compaction, OM depletion
• Farm interest in soil health is increasing
• Cover crops, organic amendments, GPS tools & funding programs
• Less livestock manure – but could be distributed better
• Municipal sourced organics - ↑ with urban population
• Policy to decrease organics from landfill
• Policies: soil health, GL water quality, climate change &
pollinator health have OM as a key element
• Various markets / end uses for organic waste (competition)
• Cooperative efforts? marketing, policy (↓ red tape), innovation
• The future is filled with opportunities – lets make it happen!

46. Questions?
Christine Brown
Field Crop Sustainability Specialist
OMAFRA - Woodstock
Christine.brown1@ontario.ca
519-537-8305