Skip to main content

Comparison and Evaluation of Co-composting Corn Stalk or Rice Husk with Swine Waste in China

Abstract

An experimental composting system was employed to study the effect of different proportions of corn stalk, rice husk and swine waste on composting efficiency and final compost quality. Three dry mass ratios were designed with biological agent addition as blank contrast. After 84 days of a static aerobic composting process, full-scale comparison was investigated in maturity, organic nutrient and sanitarian properties. The results showed that the treatment of corn stalk co-composting with swine waste at 1:1.5 ratio with the addition of a biological agent was the first to achieve maturity and had a higher level of organic fertiliser quality, and hygienic indicators of the compost product were satisfied within the relevant standards for harm. Meanwhile, the effect of the biological agent on acceleration of degradation was verified in corn stalk composting. This study found rice husk compost did not reach ideal high temperature. The maturity effect of the final product was relatively poor. Except the treatment of rice husk mixing swine manure at 1:2 ratio with biological agent, other treatments of rice husk had lower and less-effective products, no positive effect was observed in the rice husk compost. At the end of this paper some suggestions were given to develop new approaches for rice husk utilisation and reduce the cost of corn stalk co-composting.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

References

  1. China Agriculture Yearbook editorial committee: Chinese agriculture statistical yearbook 2013, China Agricultural Press, Beijing (2012)

  2. Ma, G.X., Yu, F., Cao, D., Niu, K.Y.: Calculation of agriculture non-point source pollution emission in China and its long-term forecast. Acta Sci. Circum. 32, 489–497 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  3. He, X.T., Traina, S.J.: Reviews and analyses:chemical properties of municipal solid waste composts. J. Environ. Qual. 21, 318–329 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bernal, M.P., Alburquerque, J.A., Moral, R.: Composting of animal manures and chemical criteria for compost maturity assessment. Rev. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 5444–5453 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Goyal, S., Dhull, S.K., Kapoor, K.K.: Chemical and biological changes during composting of different organic wastes and assessment of compost maturity. Bioresour. Technol. 96, 1584–1591 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bustamante, M.A., Paredes, C., MarhuendaEgea, F.C., Pérez-Espinosa, A., Bernal, M.P., Moral, R.: Co-composting of distillery wastes with animal manures: carbon and nitrogen transformations in the evaluation of compost stability. Chemosphere 72, 551–557 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Larney, F.J., Hao, X.: A review of composting as a management alternative for beef cattle feedlot manure in southern Alberta. Canada. Bioresour. Technol. 98, 3221–3227 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Agnew, J.M., Leonard, J.J.: The physical properties of compost. Compost Sci. Util. 11, 238–264 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pant, A.P., Radovich, T.J., Hue, N.V., Paull, R.E.: Biochemical properties of compost tea associated with compost quality and effects on pak choi growth. Sci. Hortic. 148, 138–146 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hargreaves, J.C., Adl, M.S., Warman, P.R.: A review of the use of composted municipal solid waste in agriculture. Agr Ecosyst. Environ. 123, 1–14 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Itavaara, M., Venelampi, O., Vikman, M., Kapanen, Z.: Compost maturity—problems associated with testing, pp. 373–382. Springer, Berlin (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wang, C.M., Changa, C.M., Watson, M.E., Dick, W.A., Chen, Y., Hoitink, H.A.J.: Maturity indices of composted dairy and pigmanures. Soil Biol. Biochem. 36, 767–776 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Garcia, C., Hernandez, T., Costa, F., Ayuso, M.: Evaluation of the maturity of municipal waste compost using simple chemical parameters. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 23, 1501–1512 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Huang, G.F., Fang, M., Wu, Q.T., Zhou, L.X., Liao, X.D., Wong, J.W.C.: Co-composting of pig manure with leaves EnvironTechnol 22, 1203–1212 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wu, L.K., Ma, L.Q.: Relationship between compost stability and extractable organic carbon. J. Environ. Qual. 31, 1323–1328 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. CunhaQueda, A.C., Vallini, G., Agnolucci, M., Coelho, C.A., Campos, L., de Sousa, R.B.: Microbiological and chemical characterization of composts at different levels of maturity, with evaluation of phytotoxicity and enzymatic activities, pp. 345–355. Springer, Berlin (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Karak, T., Bhattacharyya, P., Paul, R.K., Das, T., Saha, S.K.: Evaluation of composts from agricultural wastes with fish pond sediment as bulking agent to improve compost quality. Clean–Soil, Air Water. 41, 711–723 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Brito, L.M., Coutinho, J., Smith, S.R.: Methods to improve the composting process of the solid fraction of dairy cattle slurry. Bioresour. Technol. 99, 8955–8960 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Vikman, M., Karjomaa, S., Kapanen, A., Wallenius, K., Itävaara, M.: The influence of lignin content and temperature on the biodegradation of lignocelluloses in composting conditions. Applmicr. Biotechnol. 59, 591–598 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Liang, C., Das, K.C., McClendon, R.W.: The influence of temperature and moisture contents regimes on the aerobic microbial activity of biosolids composting blend. Bioresour. Technol. 86, 131–137 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Navarro, A.F., Cegarra, J., Roig, A., Garcia, D.: Relationships between organic matter and carbon of organic wastes. Bioresour. Technol. 44, 203–207 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ichida, J., Krizova, L., Lefevre, C., Keener, H., Elwell, D., Brutt Jr, E.: Bacterial inoculum enhances keratin degradation and biofilm formation in poultry compost. J. Microbiol. Methods 47, 199–208 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. China National Standardization Management Committee: Sanitary standard for the non-hazardous treatment of night soil (GB7959-2012). Standards Press of China, Beijing (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Navarro, A.F., Cegarra, J., Roig, A., Bernal, M.P.: An automatic microanalysis method for the determination of organic carbon in wastes. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 22, 2137–2144 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Zucconi, F., Monaco, A., Debertoldi, M.: Biological evaluation of compost maturity. Biocycle. 22, 27–29 (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Zhang, X.F., Wang, H.T.: Composting pig manure with sawdust on a pilot scale. Rural Eco-Environ. 18, 19–22 (2002)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Morel, J.L., Colin, F., Germon, J.C., Godin, P., Juste, C.: Methods for the evaluation of the maturity of municipal refuse compost. In: Composting of agricultural and other wastes. (Ed JKR Gasser). (1985)

  28. Hirai, M.F., Chamyasak, V., Kubota, H.: Standard measurement for compost maturity. BioCycle J waste Recycl 24, 54–56 (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Chefetz, B., Hatcher, P.G., Hadar, Y., Chen, Y.: Chemical and biological characterization of organic matter during composting of municipal solid waste. J. Environ. Qual. 25(4), 776–785 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Riffaldi, R., Levi-Minzi, R., Pera, A., De Bertoldi, M.: Evaluation of compost maturity by means of chemical and microbial analyses. Waste Manage. Res. 4, 387–396 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Zhang, H.Y.: Maturity evaluation of kitchen waste, pig manure and corn-straw co-composting. Environ. Eng. 31, 470–474 (2013)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Wang, D.Q., Pan, S.: Application of fuzzy mathematics assessment in the compost maturity evaluation. J. Agro- Environ Sci. 24, 212–215 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lopez Zavala, M.A., Funamizu, N., Takakuwa, T.: Modelingof aerobic biodegradation of feces using sawdust as a matrix. Water Res. 38, 1327–1339 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. China’s Ministry of Agriculture: Standard for microbial organic fertilizers (NY884-2012). Standards Press of China, Beijing (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Fang, M., Wong, J.W.C., Ma, K.K., Wong, H.: Co-composting of sewage sludge and coal fly ash: nutrient transformations. Bioresour. Technol. 67, 19–24 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Chinese Agriculture Technology Extension Center.: Organic fertilizer resources in China. China Agricultural Press, Beijing (1999)

  37. Rynk, R.M.: On-farm composting handbook. Northeast Regional Agric. Eng. Serv., Ithaca, NY(1992)

  38. Brodie, H.L., Carr, L.E., Condon, P.: A comparison of static pile and turned windrow methods for poultry litter compost production. Compost Sci. Util. 8, 178–189 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Haga, K.: Managing manure on Japanese livestock and poultry farms. Biocycle 42, 66 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  40. Wang, C., Lin, Y., Huang, W., Chiu L:Raw materials used for composting. In: Compost Production: A Manual for Asian Farmers. FFTC Publication, Taipei, Taiwan (2005)

  41. Külcü, R., Yaldiz, O.: The composting of agricultural wastes and the new parameter for the assessment of the process. Ecol. Eng. 69, 220–225 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Charest, M.H., Beauchamp, C.J.: Composting of de-inking paper sludge with poultry manureat three nitrogen levels using mechanical turning: behavior of physico-chemical parameters. Bioresour. Technol. 81, 7–17 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Tognetti, C., Mazzarino, M.J., Laos, F.: Improving the quality of municipal organic waste compost. Bioresour. Technol. 98, 1067–1076 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Huang, G.F., Wong, J.W.C., Wu, Q.T., Nagar, B.B.: Effect of C/N on composting of pig manure with sawdust. Waste Manage. 24, 805–813 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Banegas, V., Moreno, J.L., Moreno, J.I., García, C., León, G., Hernández, T.: Composting anaerobic and aerobic sewage sludges using two proportions of sawdust. Waste Manage. 27, 1317–1327 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Genevini, P., Adani, F., Villa, C.: Rice hull degradation by co-composting with dairy cattle slurry. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 43, 135–147 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Anda, M., Syed Omar, S.R., Shamshuddin, J., Fauziah, C.I.: Changes in properties of composting rice husk and their effects on soil and cocoa growth. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 39, 2221–2249 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Massey, F.P., Ennos, A.R., Hartley, S.E.: Grasses and the resource availability hypothesis: the importance of silica-based defenses. J. Ecol. 95, 414–424 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Zhang, J.H., Tian, G.M., Yao, J.: Effect of different bulking agents on aerobic composting of swine manure. J Soil. Conserv. 26, 131–135 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  50. Soda, W., Noble, A.D., Suzuki, S., Simmons, R., Sindhusen, L.A., Bhuthorndharaj, S.: Co-composting of acid waste bentonites and their effects on soil properties and crop biomass. J. Environ. Qual. 35, 2293–2301 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Isoda, N., Rodrigues, R., Silva, A., Gonçalves, M., Mandelli, D., Figueiredo, F.C.A., Carvalho, W.A.: Optimization of preparation conditions of activated carbon from agriculture waste utilizing factorial design. Powder Tech 256, 175–181 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. de Souza Rodrigues, C., Ghavami, K., Stroeven, P.: Rice husk ash as a supplementary raw material for the production of cellulose–cement composites with improved performance. Waste Biomass Valor. 1, 241–249 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71273254) and Beijing Science and Technology Plan Projects.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chuanbin Zhou.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gao, H., Zhou, C., Wang, R. et al. Comparison and Evaluation of Co-composting Corn Stalk or Rice Husk with Swine Waste in China. Waste Biomass Valor 6, 699–710 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-015-9419-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-015-9419-7

Keywords

  • Agricultural waste
  • Co-compost
  • Biological agent
  • Organic fertiliser quality