1. Bob Woods Area Extension Agronomy Specialist
Developing a Fertilizer Plan using Poultry Litter and Commercial Fertilizer
Bob Woods
Area Extension Agronomy Specialist

2. Plant absorption of Nitrogen.
Fuel Tank Nutrient
Plants absorb N from large volume of soil.

3. Crop absorption of immobile nutrients (P and K).
Immobile nutrients can buildup to adequate levels (crankcase)

4. Nitrogen Requirement Crop to be grown Yield goal N requirement
N needs = N requirement - Soil NO3-N
Credits for subsurface and manure N

5. Fertilizer Recommendations
Nitrogen Based on Yield Goals Introduced Forages – 50 lbs N/Ton Corn – 1.2 lbs N/Bushel Wheat – 2 lbs N/Bushel
Phosphorus and Potassium based on % sufficiency – Recommendation is amount needed annually to achieve optimum yields

6. Bermudagrass Response to N
N Rate 50
100
150
200
Expected Yield
1.0
1.8
2.8
3.4
3.9

7. 3 ton yield goal
142 lbs N/A

8. Calibration Stamp
Ramped N Rich Strip 2005

9. In season environmental conditions
Handheld Unit –
Temporal Variability
In season environmental conditions
6 handheld GreenSeeker™ units located in Extension Offices

10. Muskogee Co. NO3 lbs/A 2006
362 samples
Range

11. Phosphorus Requirement
Soil test P index (Mehlich 3 method)
Percent sufficiency
P requirement (P2O5 lbs/acre)

12. 65
Full Mark on
Dipstick
Very low

13. 250
Full Mark on
Dipstick
Low

14. Percent Sufficiency Phosphorus Index - 9 64% Sufficient
Potassium Index % Sufficient
.64 X .84 = % Sufficient
Would expect 54% of optimum yield if P and K are not applied.

15. Bermudagrass/Fertilizer Demo. Mayes Co
Bermudagrass/Fertilizer Demo. Mayes Co. Fertilized May 12, Harvested August 5, 1997
Yield
lb./a
Nitrogen Rate

16. Muskogee County P index 2006
362 samples
Range

17. Muskogee County K Index 2006
362 samples
Range 56 – 2301

19. Muskogee County pH 2006
362 samples
Range 4.2 – 7.7

20. Muskogee County B.I. 2006
362 samples
Range 5.9 – 7.2

21. Poultry Litter • Manure and bedding material
- sawdust, wood shavings, rice hulls, etc.
• Excellent low cost fertilizer
• Returns soil nutrients and organic matter
• Builds soil fertility and quality
• Slowly releases nutrients
• Liming effect
Poultry litter consists of manure and bedding material
Excellent low cost fertilizer if used properly
Slowly releases nutrients which reduces the risk of nitrate leaching

22. Types of poultry litter
• Breeder: High moisture - med. - low nutrient
• Layer: High moisture – med. - low nutrient
• Pullet: Low moisture – med. - low nutrient
• Turkey: Low moisture – high nutrient
• Broiler: Low moisture – high nutrient
Too high of moisture content may require special handling/equipment. Unstable manure may heat up or produce flammable gases.
Wet manure adds weight and therefore adds cost to hauling.
However, too dry of a litter may be too dusty and abrasive to equipment.

23. Poultry Litter Nutrients
Not all nutrients available to crop in 1st yr.
Poultry litter N availability
Year after application
Surface application
Soil Incorporation
1st year
50%
60%
2nd year
15%
3rd year 6%
Plant nutrients in commercial fertilizers are mostly water soluble and readily available for plant uptake. Not all nutrients in manure are available in first year cause some are in organic form while others can be lost during application.
Remaining N leftover is lost to denitrification, volatilization, leaching or remains tied up in organic matter. For E. OK soils, volatilization or remaining tied up in organic matter is most likely.

24. Litter Nitrogen Two forms: 1. Ammonium-N & nitrate-N (inorganic)
- readily available first year if not lost (volatilized)
- can be lost if spread in thin layer and left on field
- retained if incorporated (injection, tillage, rainfall, etc.)
2. Organic
- slowly released by bacterial action
- ~ % available to crops first year
Urea is most common commercial fertilizer. Ammonium nitrate hard to find. Urea can be lost

25. Litter Phosphorus and Potassium
• Availability similar to commercial fertilizer
- P & K in inorganic form
• ~ 90% available 1st year of application
• ~ 10% available for future years

26. Application Rate • Based on nutrient requirement of crop
• Excess P may cause water contamination
• Requires soil & litter tests and yield goal estimate
• Develop a manure nutrient mgmt. plan
• Supplement with commercial fertilizer if needed
Application rates should be based on nutrient requirement of the crop. Too little nutrients will no provide sufficient crop nutrients and excess nutrients are a waste of resources resulting in soil P buildup which may cause contamination.
Develop a manure nutrient plan that consumes manure nutrients (avoid slopes, saturated soils, riparian zones, buffer strips)

27. Important Points, Assumptions, and Disclaimer
Nutrient content based on 67 poultry litter samples from NE OK and NW AR
Samples Analyzed by the OSU Soil Water and Forage Analytical Lab
Analyzed for N, P, K, Ca, Mg, S, Fe, Zn, Cu

28. Important Points, Assumptions, and Disclaimer
Prices obtained on October 5, 2005
Not an Extensive Poll
Nitrogen valued at 75% all other nutrients at 100%
Actual Litter Value Should be Site Specific and Based on Deficiency as Determined by a Soil Test

29. Assumptions and Current Fertilizer Values
11/14/06
34 ¢
22 ¢
Nitrogen (N) = 36¢
Phosphorus (P2O5) = 21¢/lb
Potassium (K2O) = 22¢
Nitrogen use from litter – 50% year 1, 15% year 2, 12% year 3
Value all of the P and K contained in litter - IF needed!

30. Litter Composition and Value
Average
High
Low
Dry Matter
Water
Total N
NO3-N
NH4-N
P2O5
K2O
Total
lbs
1480
520 62
1.2
8.7 63 54 $
16.70
11.97
12.42
41.09
lbs
1776
233
102
8.8
15.5 87 73 $
27.54
16.53
16.79
60.86
lbs
767
1224 22
.07
3.8 27 31 $
5.94
5.13
7.13
18.20

31. Litter Composition and Value
Average
High
Low Ca Mg
CaCO3
NPK
Total
Lbs 58
13.2
200 $
2.20
41.09
43.29
lbs
201
15.8
568 $
6.25
60.86
67.11
lbs 31
4.4 95 $
1.04
18.20
19.24

32. Litter Composition and Value
Average
High
Low Mg S Fe Zn Cu
Lbs
13.2
13.6
.78 .9
1.14 $
2.77
2.58
10.72
9.72
17.44
Lbs
15.8
24.8
7.8 2 $
3.31
4.71
107.25
21.60
30.60
lbs
4.4
5.6
.33
.43
.12 $
.92
1.06
4.54
4.64
1.84

35. Interactive Website for Detemining Fertilizer Value
Oklahoma State University - Soil, Water and Forage Analytical Laboratory