柏兆海1,
曹玉博1, 2,
张楠楠1, 2,
赵占轻3,
马林1,,
1.中国科学院遗传与发育生物学研究所农业资源研究中心/河北省土壤生态学重点实验室/中国科学院农业水资源重点实验室 石家庄 050022
2.中国科学院大学 北京 100049
3.河北地质大学土地资源与城乡规划学院 石家庄 050031
基金项目: 国家重点研发计划项目2018YFC0213300
国家自然科学基金项目31872403
国家自然科学基金项目31801941
大气重污染成因与治理攻关项目DQGG0208
中国科学院重点部署项目ZDRW-ZS-2016-5
中国科学院STS项目KFJ-STS-ZDTP-053
中国科学院****项目、河北省****基金项目D2017503023
河北省现代农业产业技术体系奶牛产业创新团队项目HBCT2018120206
详细信息
作者简介:刘娟, 主要从事粪污养分管理。E-mail:liujuan690317@163.com
通讯作者:马林, 主要从事农业生态学和养分管理研究。E-mail:malin1979@sjziam.ac.cn
中图分类号:S-3计量
文章访问数:1093
HTML全文浏览量:15
PDF下载量:830
被引次数:0
出版历程
收稿日期:2018-12-16
录用日期:2019-02-05
刊出日期:2019-05-01
Impact of surface acidification of manure on ammonia emission in animal housing
LIU Juan1, 2,,BAI Zhaohai1,
CAO Yubo1, 2,
ZHANG Nannan1, 2,
ZHAO Zhanqing3,
MA Lin1,,
1. Center for Agricultural Resources Research, Institute of Genetics and Developmental Biology, Chinese Academy of Sciences/Hebei Key Laboratory of Soil Ecology/Key Laboratory of Agricultural Water Resources, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shijiazhuang 050022, China
2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China
3. School of Land Resources and Urban & Rural Planning, Hebei GEO University, Shijiazhuang 050031, China
Funds: the National Key R & D Program of China2018YFC0213300
the National Natural Science Foundation of China31872403
the National Natural Science Foundation of China31801941
the National Research Program for Key Issues in Air Pollution Control of ChinaDQGG0208
the Key Research Program of the Chinese Academy SciencesZDRW-ZS-2016-5
STS Project of the Chinese Academy of SciencesKFJ-STS-ZDTP-053
the 100-Talent Project of Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Distinguished Young Scientists Project of Natural Science Foundation of HebeiD2017503023
the Hebei Dairy Cattle Innovation Team of Modern Agro-industry Technology Research SystemHBCT2018120206
More Information
Corresponding author:E-mail:malin1979@sjziam.ac.cn
摘要
HTML全文
图
参考文献
相关文章
施引文献
资源附件
访问统计
摘要
摘要:氨气是形成雾霾前体物的关键物质，而家畜养殖圈舍是氨气的重要排放源。本文选择圈舍环节新鲜猪粪和牛粪作为试验样品，利用动态箱-硼酸吸收法，研究了不同类型酸和不同剂量酸的表层酸化对圈舍粪尿氨排放的影响，探讨圈舍氨减排的方法。研究发现：按0.31 mL·cm-2的喷施量在猪粪表层喷施0.012 mol·L-1和0.006 mol·L-1乳酸，24 h氨累积排放量可分别减少43%（P < 0.05）和32%（P=0.07）；喷施0.017 mol·L-1和0.009 mol·L-1磷酸后，氨排放可分别减少74%（P < 0.01）和61%（P < 0.05）；粪尿表面喷洒0.017 mol·L-1磷酸72 h后仍可减少氨排放64%（P < 0.01）。另外，用同样方法对牛粪酸化可降低氨排放80%左右，且在不添加新粪的情况下，粪尿表层酸化间隔对24 h内氨减排效率无显著影响。同时，粪尿表面酸化仅改变粪尿表层pH，对粪尿整体pH无显著影响。综上所述：圈舍粪尿表面酸化可以大幅度降低氨气挥发，其减排效果与酸的种类、浓度及粪尿类型有关，是一种实现圈舍氨减排且经济可行的方法，此研究也可为家畜养殖业圈舍酸化氨减排技术提供科学数据支撑。
关键词:粪尿pH/
氨挥发/
家畜粪尿/
养殖圈舍/
氨减排/
粪尿表面酸化
Abstract:Ammonia is a key substance in the formation of haze precursors, and livestock pen is one of the main sources of ammonia emission. Here, we selected fresh cow and sow manure to evaluate the impacts of surface acidification on ammonia emission under simulated livestock pen conditions with different acids of different concentrations. Acid solution was sprayed on the surface of the manure to acidify the manure surface. Ammonia emission was measured using the dynamic boric acid trap method. Our results revealed that when lactic acid was diluted to 0.012 mol·L-1 and 0.006 mol·L-1 and applied on the surface of manure at the rate of 0.31 mL·cm-2, ammonia emission from sow manure reduced respectively by 43% (P < 0.05) and 32% (P=0.07) in 24 h, compared with the control treatment. Ammonia emission reduced by 74% (P < 0.01) and 61% (P < 0.05) respectively for 0.017 mol·L-1 and 0.009 mol·L-1 of diluted phosphoric acids. Ammonia emission of sow manure reduced by 64% (P < 0.01) within 72 h treatment of 0.017 mol·L-1 phosphoric acid. Using the same treatment method as before, surface acidification of cow manure reduced ammonia emission by 80% compared with control treatment. The frequency of acid addition to manure surface had no significant impact on ammonia emission mitigation when manure was not refreshed. Surface acidification lowered manure pH, but with no significant impact on the whole manure. Overall, surface acidification reduced ammonia emission in animal pens. The reduction efficiency depended not only on the type and concentration of acid, but also on the type of manure. Surface acidification of manure was a cost-effective ammonia abatement technique. This study also supported the increasing understanding of manure acidification technology aimed at reducing ammonia emission from animal pens.
Key words:Manure pH/
Ammonia emission/
Animal manure/
Animal housing/
Ammonia emission reduction/
Manure surface acidification
HTML全文
图1动态箱-硼酸吸收氨气测定方法及装置
Figure1.Dynamic boric acid method and device
下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片
图2试验粪尿0~24 h氨气排放速率及表层酸化对其影响(a、b、c分别为表 1中的试验1、试验2和试验3)
Figure2.Effect of surface acidification on ammonia gas emission rates of manure in 0-24 hours (a, b and c are the experiment 1, 2, 3 shown in the table 1, respectively)
下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片
图3试验粪尿24 h内NH3累积损失量及表层酸化对其影响(a、b、c分别为表 1中的试验1、试验2和试验3)
Figure3.Effects of surface acidification on NH3 losses of manure in 24 hours (a, b and C are the experiment 1, 2, 3 shown in the table 1, respectively)
下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片
图4喷施0.012 mol·L-1磷酸的间隔对试验粪尿24 h氨气累积损失量的影响
Figure4.Effect of spraying 0.012 mol·L-1 phosphoric acid interval on NH3 losses from manure within 24 hours
下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片
图5试验粪尿72 h内氨气排放量及表层酸化对其影响(a、b、c分别为表 1中的试验1、试验2和试验3
Figure5.Effects of surface acidification on NH3 losses of manure in 72 hours (a, b and c are the experiment 1, 2, 3 shown in the table 1, respectively)
下载: 全尺寸图片幻灯片表1试验设计
Table1.The details of experimental design
| 试验 Experiment | 粪尿种类 Manure | 处理 Treatment | 酸浓度 Acid concentration (mol·L-1) | 喷酸量 Acid amount (mL·cm-2) | 喷酸时间1) Acid-spraying time1)(h) | 测定时间1) Measurement time1) (h) | 试验温度 Experiment temperature (℃) |
| 1 | 奶牛 Cow | 对照Control | — | 0 | — | 0, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 | 25 |
| 乳酸Lactic acid | 0.400 | 0.14 | 0, 6, 12 | 0, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 | 25 | ||
| 2 | 妊娠母猪 Sow | 对照Control | — | 0 | — | 0, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72 | 37 |
| 乳1 Lactic acid 1 | 0.012 | 0.31 | 0, 6, 12 | 0, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72 | 37 | ||
| 乳2 Lactic acid 2 | 0.006 | 0.31 | 0, 6, 12 | 0, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72 | 37 | ||
| 磷1 Phosphoric acid 1 | 0.017 | 0.31 | 0, 6, 12 | 0, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72 | 37 | ||
| 磷2 Phosphoric acid 2 | 0.009 | 0.31 | 0, 6, 12 | 0, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72 | 37 | ||
| 3 | 育肥猪Fatting pig | 对照Control | — | 0 | 0, 6, 12 | 0, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72 | 32 |
| 乳2 Lactic acid 2 | 0.006 | 0.31 | 0, 6, 12 | 0, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72 | 32 | ||
| 磷2 Phosphoric acid 2 | 0.009 | 0.31 | 0, 6, 12 | 0, 4, 8, 12, 24, 48, 72 | 32 | ||
| 4 | 奶牛Cow | 对照Control | — | 0 | — | 0, 6, 8, 12 | 28 |
| 12 h喷1次磷酸Spray phosphoric acid every 12 hours | 0.012 | 0.31 | 0, 12 | 0, 12 | 28 | ||
| 8 h喷1次磷酸Spray phosphoric acid every8 hours | 0.012 | 0.31 | 0, 8 | 0, 8 | 28 | ||
| 6 h喷1次磷酸Spray phosphoric acid every6 hours | 0.012 | 0.31 | 0, 6 | 0, 6 | 28 | ||
| 1)时间为试验开始后的时间。1) Time is hours after begin of the experiment. | |||||||
下载: 导出CSV表2试验用粪尿原始样品和不同处理后24 h和72 h的NH4+-N含量和pH变化
Table2.Changes of NH4+-N content and pH of manure before and after 24 h and 72 h of the experiments
| 试验 Experiment | 粪尿种类 Manure | 处理 Treatment | NH4+-N (g·kg-1) | pH | ||||
| 0 h | 24 h | 72 h | 0 h | 24 h | 72 h | |||
| 1 | 奶牛 Cow | 原始样品Original sample | 1.11±0.04 | 7.73±0.25 | ||||
| 对照Control | 1.15 | 0.84±0.03 | 8.03 | 7.98±0.11 | ||||
| 乳酸Lactic acid | 1.23 | 1.55±0.07 | 6.61 | 7.01±0.16 | ||||
| 2 | 妊娠母猪 Sow | 原始样品Original sample | 0.18±0.05 | 8.94±0.02 | ||||
| 对照Control | 0.34 | 0.19±0.02 | 8.53 | 8.64±0.24 | ||||
| 乳1 Lactic acid 1 | 0.17 | 0.18±0.00 | 8.73 | 8.04±0.20 | ||||
| 乳2 Lactic acid 2 | 0.25 | 0.20±0.03 | 8.62 | 8.00±0.40 | ||||
| 磷1 Phosphoric acid 1 | 0.26 | 0.26±0.02 | 7.68 | 7.28±0.30 | ||||
| 磷2 Phosphoric acid 2 | 0.35 | 0.23±0.09 | 8.12 | 7.88±0.29 | ||||
| 3 | 育肥猪 Fattening pig | 原始样品Original sample | 1.77±0.02 | 8.08±0.00 | ||||
| 对照Control | 1.44 | 1.02±0.00 | 6.94 | 8.01±0.26 | ||||
| 乳2 Lactic acid 2 | 1.68 | 1.04±0.02 | 7.54 | 8.11±0.26 | ||||
| 磷2 Phosphoric acid 2 | 1.56 | 1.36±0.26 | 7.55 | 7.97±0.31 | ||||
下载: 导出CSV参考文献
| [1] | BOUWMAN A F, Lee D S, ASMAN W A H, et al. A global high-resolution emission inventory for ammonia[J]. Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 1997, 11(4):561-587 doi: 10.1029/97GB02266 |
| [2] | REIS S, HOWARD C, SUTTON M A. Costs of Ammonia Abatement and the Climate Co-Benefits[M]. Netherlands:Springer, 2015 |
| [3] | GU B J, GE Y, REN Y, et al. Atmospheric reactive nitrogen in China:Sources, recent trends, and damage costs[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2012, 46(17):9420-9427 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=290b0398a5bd4df7ef11f8bf08a655cd |
| [4] | GU B J, JU X T, CHANG J, et al. Integrated reactive nitrogen budgets and future trends in China[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2015, 112(28):8792-8797 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1510211112 |
| [5] | PAULOT F, JACOB D J, PINDER R W, et al. Ammonia emissions in the United States, European Union, and China derived by high-resolution inversion of ammonium wet deposition data:Interpretation with a new agricultural emissions inventory (MASAGE_NH3)[J]. Journal of Geophysical Research:Atmospheres, 2014, 119(7):4343-4364 doi: 10.1002/2013JD021130 |
| [6] | NDEGWA P M, HRISTOV A N, AROGO J, et al. A review of ammonia emission mitigation techniques for concentrated animal feeding operations[J]. Biosystems Engineering, 2008, 100(4):453-469 doi: 10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2008.05.010 |
| [7] | STEVENS C J, DISE N B, MOUNTFORD J O, et al. Impact of nitrogen deposition on the species richness of grasslands[J]. Science, 2004, 303(5665):1876-1879 doi: 10.1126/science.1094678 |
| [8] | SUTTON M A, HOWARD C M, ERISMAN J W, et al. The European Nitrogen Assessment:Sources, Effects and Policy Perspectives[M]. New York:Cambridge University Press, 2011:1-5 |
| [9] | GALLOWAY J N, ABER J D, ERISMAN J W, et al. The nitrogen cascade[J]. Bioscience, 2003, 53(4):341-356 doi: 10.1641/0006-3568(2003)053[0341:TNC]2.0.CO;2 |
| [10] | MORSE D. Impact of environmental regulations on cattle production[J]. Journal of Animal Science, 1996, 74(12):3103-3011 doi: 10.2527/1996.74123103x |
| [11] | JASON WEST J, ANSARI A S, PANDIS S N. Marginal PM25:Nonlinear aerosol mass response to sulfate reductions in the eastern united states[J]. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 1999, 49(12):1415-1424 doi: 10.1080/10473289.1999.10463973 |
| [12] | 韦莲芳, 段菁春, 谭吉华, 等.北京春季大气中氨的气粒相转化及颗粒态铵采样偏差研究[J].中国科学:地球科学, 2015, 45(2):216-226 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zgkx-cd201502009 WEI L F, DUAN J C, TAN J H, et al. Gas-to-particle conversion of atmospheric ammonia and sampling artifacts of ammonium in spring of Beijing[J]. Science China:Earth Sciences, 2015, 45(2):216-226 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=zgkx-cd201502009 |
| [13] | 曹玉博, 邢晓旭, 柏兆海, 等.农牧系统氨挥发减排技术研究进展[J].中国农业科学, 2018, 51(3):566-580 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zgnykx201803014 CAO Y B, XING X X, BAI Z H, et al. Review on ammonia emission mitigation techniques of crop-livestock production system[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2018, 56(3):566-580 http://d.old.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/zgnykx201803014 |
| [14] | PETERSEN V, MARKFOGED R, HAFNER S D, et al. A new slurry pH model accounting for effects of ammonia and carbon dioxide volatilization on solution speciation[J]. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems, 2014, 100(2):189-204 doi: 10.1007/s10705-014-9637-6 |
| [15] | SOMMER S G, CLOUGH T J, BALAINE N, et al. Transformation of organic matter and the emissions of methane and ammonia during storage of liquid manure as affected by acidification[J]. Journal of Environmental Quality, 2017, 46(3):514-521 http://cn.bing.com/academic/profile?id=7a8bee6b6308c4ba03526cc16f4ebacd&encoded=0&v=paper_preview&mkt=zh-cn |
| [16] | SHI Y, PARKER D B, COLE N A, et al. Surface amendments to minimize ammonia emissions from beef cattle feedlots[J]. Transactions of the American Society of Agricultural Engineers, 2001, 44(3):677-682 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=310414d2f8d24db743061141102d4274 |
| [17] | PAIN B F, MISSELBROOK T H, REES Y J. Effects of nitrification inhibitor and acid addition to cattle slurry on nitrogen losses and herbage yields[J]. Grass and Forage Science, 1994, 49(2):209-215 doi: 10.1111/gfs.1994.49.issue-2 |
| [18] | KAI P, PEDERSEN P, JENSEN J E, et al. A whole-farm assessment of the efficacy of slurry acidification in reducing ammonia emissions[J]. European Journal of Agronomy, 2008, 28(2):148-154 doi: 10.1016/j.eja.2007.06.004 |
| [19] | HUSTED S, JENSEN L S, J?RGENSEN S S. Reducing ammonia loss from cattle slurry by the use of acidifying additives:The role of the buffer system[J]. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 1991, 57(3):335-349 doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1097-0010 |
| [20] | SAFLEY J R L M, NELSON D W, WESTERMAN P W. Conserving manurial nitrogen[J]. Transactions of the ASAE, 1983, 26(4):1166-1170 doi: 10.13031/2013.34098 |
| [21] | REGUEIRO I, COUTINHO J, FANGUEIRO D. Alternatives to sulfuric acid for slurry acidification:Impact on slurry composition and ammonia emissions during storage[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, 131:296-307 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.032 |
| [22] | HARTUNG J, PHILLIPS V R. Control of gaseous emissions from livestock buildings and manure stores[J]. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 1994, 57(3):173-189 doi: 10.1006/jaer.1994.1017 |
| [23] | MOLLOY S P, TUNNEY H. A laboratory study of ammonia volatilization from cattle and pig slurry[J]. Irish Journal of Agricultural Research, 1983, 22(1):37-45 https://www.jstor.org/stable/25556046?seq=1 |
| [24] | NEERACKAL G M, NDEGWA P M, HARRISON J H, et al. Manure-pH management for mitigating ammonia emissions from dairy barns and liquid manure storages[J]. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 2017, 33(2):235-242 doi: 10.13031/issn.0883-8542 |
| [25] | PARK S H, LEE B R, KIM T H. Effects of cattle manure and swine slurry acidification on ammonia emission as estimated by an acid trap system[J]. Journal of the Korean Society of Grassland and Forage Science, 2015, 35(3):212-216 doi: 10.5333/KGFS. |
| [26] | OWUSU-TWUM M Y, POLASTRE A, SUBEDI R, et al. Gaseous emissions and modification of slurry composition during storage and after field application:Effect of slurry additives and mechanical separation[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2017, 200:416-422 http://cn.bing.com/academic/profile?id=c7e06dfc3fcad8b8ef6e79842f521e22&encoded=0&v=paper_preview&mkt=zh-cn |
| [27] | AL-KANANI T, AKOCHI E, MACKENZIE A F, et al. Organic and inorganic amendments to reduce ammonia losses from liquid hog manure[J]. Journal of Environmental Quality, 1992, 21(4):709-715 doi: 10.2134-jeq1992.00472425002100040028x/ |
| [28] | PHILIPPE F X, LAITAT M, WAVREILLE J, et al. Ammonia and greenhouse gas emission from group-housed gestating sows depends on floor type[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2011, 140(3/4):498-505 http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=5fe00015242d445c9b4f09a151923746 |
| [29] | OGINK N W M, KROODSMA W. Reduction of ammonia emission from a cow cubicle house by flushing with water or a formalin solution[J]. Journal of Agricultural Engineering Research, 1996, 63(3):197-204 doi: 10.1006/jaer.1996.0021 |
| [30] | STEVENS R J, LAUGHLIN R J, FROST J P. Effects of separation, dilution, washing and acidification on ammonia volatilization from surface-applied cattle slurry[J]. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 1992, 119(3):383-389 doi: 10.1017/S0021859600012223 |
| [31] | STEVENS R J, LAUGHLIN R J, FROST J P. Effect of acidification with sulphuric acid on the volatilization of ammonia from cow and pig slurries[J]. The Journal of Agricultural Science, 1989, 113(3):389-395 doi: 10.1017/S0021859600070106 |
