Comparison of the effects of calcium ammonium nitrate and stabilized urea fertilizers on grass and silage yields and quality
Authors: Huson K. M. , Meehan E. J. , Allen M. , Grant N. W. , Patterson J. D. 
Published: December 2023

AbstractEffects of Calcium Ammonium Nitrate (CAN) and Stabilized Urea (SU) fertilizers were compared for herbage yield and composition and silage composition of perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) swards over a two‐year study. The aim of this experiment was to establish the likely impacts of farmers transitioning to using SU fertilizers in order to reduce the nitrogenous emissions associated with silage production as the agriculture industry moves to address the challenges of climate change. Experimental plots of 7.5 m2 area were established in a randomized block experiment comprising 4 replicates of 18 treatments in a 3 × 6 factorial design (4 × 3 × 6 = 72 plots) for each of 3 silage harvest periods in 2018, and repeated in 2019. Herbage samples and yield measurements were collected weekly for weeks 2–7 post fertilizer application, and herbage harvested after seven weeks regrowth was ensiled and silage was analysed after 100 days. There were no significance differences overall between responses of CAN and SU fertilized plots in terms of grass dry matter (DM) yield and quality parameters (acid detergent fibre (ADF), ash, buffering capacity (BC), metabolisable Energy (ME), nitrate (NO32−), nitrogen (N), or water soluble carbohydrate (WSC) or silage quality parameters (DM, volatile corrected organic dry matter (VCODM), ammonia nitrogen as a fraction of total nitrogen (NH3‐N/ Total N), pH, crude protein (CP), lactic acid (LA), acetic acid (AA), propionic acid (PA), butyric acid (BA), ethanol, propanol, ADF, ash, WSC or dry matter digestibility (DMD). Numerous significant differences between week and between cut were identified for grass quality, silage quality and grass ensilability parameters, and in the grass DM yields recorded. However, in many instances there was no associated treatment effect identified. There were no significant interactions between CAN and SU treatments and either cut, or week for nitrate concentration or yield. Variance of nitrate concentration was highest at the third cut and indicates a reduction in the nitrogen use efficiency of the 3rd cut silage harvest, potentially demonstrating a need to reduce fertilizer application recommendations for late‐season silage harvests. Overall, the results of this study support the hypothesis that replacing the currently favoured CAN fertilizer products with SU will not impact production of grass silage in Northern Ireland, meaning SU can be confidently adopted by farmers as a mitigation strategy to reduce farm nitrogenous emissions without reducing levels of sward productivity. This study recorded average annual grass silage DM yields of 15.5 and 16.1 t DM/ha from the CAN and SU fertilizer treatments respectively, which were not significantly different. In addition, the yield gain response to the application of each fertilizer type were not significantly different at 21.51 and 23.24 kg of DM produced for every kg of N applied as SU or CAN respectively, relative to control plots receiving 0 nitrogen.