This article was downloaded by: [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries]

On: 28 December 2014, At: 22:50

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Sustainable Agriculture

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjsa20

Effect of Organic Wastes and Method of Composting on

Compost Maturity, Nutrient Composition of Compost
and Yields of Two Vegetable Crops
a b c
J. A. Adediran , L. B. Taiwo & R. A. Sobulo
a
Institute of Agricultural Research and Training, Obafemi Awolowo University , P.M.B. 5029,
Ibadan, Nigeria E-mail:
b
Institute of Agricultural Research and Training, Obafemi Awolowo University , P.M.B. 5029,
Ibadan, Nigeria
c
Soilab Services Limited , 10, Balogun Kobomoje close., Off Ring Road, P.O. Box 10195,
Ibadan, Nigeria
Published online: 08 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: J. A. Adediran , L. B. Taiwo & R. A. Sobulo (2003) Effect of Organic Wastes and Method of Composting on
Compost Maturity, Nutrient Composition of Compost and Yields of Two Vegetable Crops, Journal of Sustainable Agriculture,
22:4, 95-109, DOI: 10.1300/J064v22n04_08

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J064v22n04_08

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Effect of Organic Wastes and Method
of Composting on Compost Maturity,
Nutrient Composition of Compost and Yields
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

of Two Vegetable Crops

J. A. Adediran
L. B. Taiwo
R. A. Sobulo

ABSTRACT. Two field experiments were carried out to evaluate the ef-
fect of composts prepared from different organic waste materials on two
vegetable crops. Poultry litter with each of the following organic wastes,
maize residues, leaf litter, urban waste, weed biomass and soybean resi-
due, were composted using three methods of composting–Passively Aer-
ated Composting Technique in a pile (PACT-1), Passively Aerated
Composting Technique in a plastic pot (PACT-2) and Windrow (Wdr).
Tomato (Lycosipercum esculentum Mill.) and amaranthus (Amaranthus
cruentus) were planted as test crops. The C:N ratio and nutrient concen-
trations varied with type of organic waste materials. The leaf litter and
weed biomass contained high C:N ratio (38 and 45, respectively) and
therefore produced composts that matured a few weeks later than those

J. A. Adediran and L. B. Taiwo are affiliated with the Institute of Agricultural Re-
search and Training, Obafemi Awolowo University, P.M.B. 5029, Ibadan, Nigeria
(E-mail: Jadediran@yahoo.co.uk).
R. A. Sobulo is affiliated with Soilab Services Limited, 10, Balogun Kobomoje
close., Off Ring Road, P.O. Box 10195, Ibadan, Nigeria.
The authors are grateful to the Institute of Agricultural Research and Training,
Ibadan for the facilities provided for the execution of these experiments. The authors
are also grateful for the highly commendable technical support of Messrs. Oladapo and
Raimi.
The authors appreciate the financial support of the World Bank through the Na-
tional Agricultural Research Project in Nigeria.
Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, Vol. 22(4) 2003
http://www.haworthpress.com/store/product.asp?sku=J064
 2003 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.
10.1300/J064v22n04_08 95
 96 JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

from organic wastes with C:N ratio falling within the optimum range of
25-35. The C:N ratio of the organic wastes were highly reduced at the
end of composting. Irrespective of method used for composting, N in the
soybean-based compost increased by 37-71% over the concentrations in
the other composts. Phosphorus in the leaf litter- and soybean-based
composts increased by 13.6-34.9% over the level in the urban and
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

weed-based composts. However, K levels in the maize- and weed-bio-

mass based composts increased by 7-37% over other composts. Soy-
bean- and leaf litter-based composts in general were greater in both
secondary and micronutrient elements than other composts. The results
from field evaluation indicated that the effectiveness of the composts on
amaranthus productivity can be rated in the ascending order of soybean,
leaf litter, weed, maize and urban waste composts. For tomato, the com-
posts from maize and soybean residues were more effective than other
composts. Mostly, the effectiveness of the composts on the productivity
of the vegetable crops varied according to methods of composting and
followed in the ascending order of Wdr, PACT-1 and PACT-2. [Article
copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service:
1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <docdelivery@haworthpress.com> Web-
site: <http://www.HaworthPress.com>  2003 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All
rights reserved.]

KEYWORDS. Organic wastes, composting method, compost maturity,

amaranthus, tomato

INTRODUCTION

Organic waste materials mainly of animal and plant origin are potential
sources of organic matter and plant nutrients. Traditionally, the waste materi-
als are used as a source of nutritional elements and/or soil conditioner directly
or indirectly in the field. At times organic residues are burnt in the field to re-
duce obstructions during land preparation. The benefits derived from utiliza-
tion of organic materials for improvement of soil fertility and crop production
have been well discussed by many authors (Tandon, 1992; Tian et al., 1992;
Parr et al., 1986; Parr et al., 1984). The importance of balanced fertilization us-
ing organic waste materials, supplemented with other nutrient sources includ-
ing employment of appropriate cultural practices, cannot be overemphasized
(Lombin et al., 1994).
A major problem commonly encountered by most farmers is that the
amount of organic wastes required to meet the crop nutrient needs is high and
therefore cannot early be met. Also, some of the materials are not easy to han-
dle or apply and may produce unpleasant odor. Organic waste materials con-
 Research, Reviews, Practices, Policy and Technology 97

tain low levels of nutrients that are slowly released when applied to the soil.
Processing of these wastes by composting will provide an opportunity to re-
duce bulk and odor, while increasing the nutritive values of the materials (Gray
and Briddlestone, 1981; FAO, 1987; Parr et al., 1986).
Effectiveness of compost depends principally on source and type of organic
material, method of composting and compost maturity. Production of stabi-
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

lized compost is highly important in agriculture (Saviozzi et al., 1988; Zucconi

et al., 1981). Maturity of compost is an indication of its stability, which may in
turn affect its effectiveness in providing an immediate or long-term supply of
nutrients to crop plants. Mature compost provides a stabilized form of organic
matter (humus) and has the potential to enhance nutrient release in the soil
more than do raw organic wastes. For agricultural purposes, other benefits
have also been attributed to the production and use of mature composts
(N’Dayegamiye et al., 1997). Time to maturity, however, depends on factors
such as type of substrate, organic components of the substrate, C:N ratio, tem-
perature regime during composting, etc. (Taiwo, 1997; John et al., 1995). Or-
ganic wastes, such as animal manures, crop residues, forest wastes, leaf litters,
etc., are commonly found in farm locations and farming communities. Urban
populations generally perceive urban waste as a nuisance. These materials,
however, could be utilized more effectively and sustainably through recycling
rather than being destroyed through burning as commonly practised by many
farming and urban communities, where it causes air pollution.
The present study was undertaken to evaluate the performance of five com-
post materials on two vegetable crops, as influenced by source (type) of or-
ganic waste materials and method of composting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Organic Waste Sources

Poultry litter was collected from the broiler house at the Federal College of
Agriculture, Ibadan. The litter was a mixture of sawdust, broiler faeces (ex-
creta) and feed waste. Maize residues were collected from the production plot
and seed-processing unit of the Institute of Agricultural Research and Training
(IAR&T), Ibadan. The maize residues consisted of dry leaves, ear sheaths and
cobs. Urban wastes were obtained from a major dumping site in the Ibadan
municipality. These wastes consisted of organic by-products from industries,
household wastes, and market wastes. All non-compostable materials con-
tained in the wastes were sorted out and not included in sample analysis and
compost preparation.
Leaf litter was obtained by gathering leaf falls from a large acacia tree. The
leaf litter contained leaves, stalk and petiole. Weed biomass was harvested
 98 JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

from the bush area predominantly covered by giant grass (Pennisetum sp.) and
siam weed (Chromoleana odorata). Both these weeds grow massively and are
commonly found in the region around the experimental site. They are usually
burnt off during land preparation and at times those fires are a source of fire
outbreak on farms during the dry season. Soybean residues consisting of dry
stems, leaves and a few pods were obtained from the seed-processing unit of
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

the IAR&T, Ibadan. Soybean production has been widely adopted in Nigeria
and the crop is now an important source of protein in the diet of many Nigeri-
ans.

Organic Waste and Compost Analyses

Representative samples were taken from each of the waste materials, dried,
ground and analysed in the laboratory. Total N was determined by distilation
method after wet digestion of material with nitric perchloric acid. Phosphorus
was determined colorimetrically using the vanadomolybdate yellow method
and K was read on the flame photometer. Organic C determination was car-
ried out by the dichromate acid oxidation method using the Walkley-Black
method.
Samples were also taken from the composts for chemical analysis in the lab-
oratory. The pH measurement was done at the beginning of compost prepara-
tion (0 weeks), and at 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks of composting. Compost pH in water
(1:5 w/v) was determined by using a glass electrode pH meter. Plant nutrient
concentrations in the mature composts were determined as described for the
organic materials used in preparing the composts. In addition, Ca, Mg, Fe, Zn,
Cu and Mn were analysed in the digest by atomic absorption spectrophoto-
meter.

Compost Preparation

The bulking agents used for compost preparation were mainly maize resi-
dues, urban waste, soybean residues, weeds, and leaf litter. The materials were
reduced to 5 mm or less in size with a chopper (shredder). Each of the materials
was layered with poultry manure in a 3:1 (30 kg organic material:10 kg poultry
manure) ratio by dry weight. Three methods of composting were used: wind-
row (Wdr), passively aerated composting techniques in a pile (PACT-1) and
passively aerated composting technique in a pot (PACT-2). The Wdr and
PACT-1 composts were prepared by piling the materials on a flat ground sur-
face. The PACT-1 method was accomplished by inserting four bamboo pipes
within the pile to provide ventilation. Two pipes were inserted on the sides,
one on each side and two were inserted near the top of the pile. The entire body
of the pile was covered with a black nylon (thin plastic) sheet to conserve
moisture and heat, and to minimize loss of ammonia. In the PACT-2 method,
 Research, Reviews, Practices, Policy and Technology 99

each of the bulking agents was thoroughly mixed (not layered) with poultry
manure in the same ratio of 3:1 and placed in a 100 L plastic pot (compost bin),
which was covered with a lid. Three bamboo poles (ventilation pipes) were in-
serted into the bin, one each on opposite sides and one near the top of the pot.
The compost bin was cut to allow the pipes to extend outside of the bin. The
PACT-1 and PACT-2 provided partial aeration of the compost by allowing
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

ambient movement of air in and out of the system through the bamboo pipes.
On the other hand, the simple windrow heap method (Wdr) was not covered
and ventilation was not provided. The PACT-1 and PACT-2 composts were
watered only at the beginning of the composting process. For the Wdr, com-
post was watered at the beginning of the composting process and when the
compost was turned. The temperature of each of the composts was monitored
at the beginning of the composting process and at 3 day intervals for about 3
weeks. Thereafter, temperature measurement was done weekly until full com-
post maturity stage. Temperatures were measured 5 cm from the top, in the
centre and 10 cm to the bottom. Temperatures at the three levels were com-
bined and the average was recorded.

Field Growth Trial

Field trials were conducted on loamy sand of Iwo series, an Alfisol, charac-
terised by low nutrient status. Soil samples were collected before compost ap-
plication and analysed for major plant nutrients in the laboratory. The soil,
prior to compost addition, had a pH in water (1:1 w/v) of 5.9, contained 5.02 g
kg⫺1 organic C, 0.64 g kg⫺1 total N, 3.25 mg kg⫺1 P, 0.27 C mol kg⫺1 K and
the CEC was 2.78 C mol kg⫺1. Each of the composts prepared from a specific
bulking agent and method of preparation constituted a treatment.
The composts were cured under shade and were evaluated on amaranthus
(Amaranthus cruentus) and tomato (Lycopersicum esculentum Mill.). The
crops were separately planted in the field in adjacent plots. Two cropping cy-
cles were planted, one following the other. The treatment plots were laid out
using a randomized complete block design and replicated three times. Plot size
was 2 m ⫻ 2 m for amaranthus and 2 m ⫻ 3 m for tomato. The composts were
broadcast applied and incorporated into the soil at 80 kg N ha⫺1 prior to plant-
ing the first crop, and therefore varied in weight (on dry matter basis) due to
variation in total N content in the materials.
Amaranthus was drilled seeded a week after compost application and later
thinned as needed for optimum plant stands. Tomato seedlings were trans-
planted, at two plants per hole, and later staked. Other cultural operations re-
quired for the optimum production of the two crops were carried out as
recommended for the zone of the experiment. Amaranthus was harvested
green and fresh at marketable stage. Plants were randomly sampled, weighed
 100 JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

and oven dried at 65°C to obtain dry weight. Plant dry weight and nitrogen
content were determined. Tomato fruit number and yield were determined at
marketable ripening stage. Statistical analysis of the results was carried out us-
ing the SAS method (SAS, 1985).
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

RESULTS

Nutrient Levels in the Organic Materials

The concentrations of major nutrients in the organic materials used for com-
posting are shown in Table 1. The materials differed in nutrient composition.
The poultry manure contained the highest concentration of N, followed by
soybean residues. These materials, including leaf litter, had almost the same
level of P, which was about 150-300% greater than P levels in maize residues,
weed biomass and urban waste. The level of K in poultry manure, maize resi-
dues and leaf litter differed only slightly. Weed biomass, soybean residues and
urban waste contained similar but lower K concentrations. The C:N ratios of
the organic materials wastes were in the range between 30 and 38, with the ex-
ception of poultry manure, which contained the lowest value (16).

Temperature Regime of Compost

The pattern of temperature variation during composting is illustrated in Fig-

ure 1. The rise and fall in temperature in the composts were very similar for the
different composting methods and different composting materials. The results,
in general, showed that initially there was a sharp increase in compost temper-

TABLE 1. Composition of major nutrients in organic materials used for com-

posting.

Organic materials N, g/kg P, g/kg K, g/kg C:N

Maize residues 8.6bc 2.0c 11.0ab 35.5b
Urban wastes 6.4c 3.5b 8.0c 30.4c
Poultry manure 12.4a 8.1a 13.4a 16.2d
Leaf litter 9.2b 7.8a 10.2b 38.5b
Weed biomass 7.4c 3.2b 8.6c 45.0a
Soybean residue 10.0b 8.4a 7.5c 30.0c
The numbers having the same letter along the column are not significantly different at probability level
of 5%
 Research, Reviews, Practices, Policy and Technology 101

FIGURE 1. Effect of organic waste and method of composting on compost tem-

perature at different composting time.

Maize based compost P1

Temperature (°C)

80 P2
Wdr
60 Lsd = 0.05
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

40
20
0
0 4 7 13 19 24 30 36 42 48 54 60

Leaf litter compost

Urban waste compost
Temperature (°C)

80

Temperature (°C)
80
Lsd = 0.05
60 Lsd = 0.05 60
40 40

20 20
0
0
0 4 7 13 19 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 0 4 7 13 19 24 30 36 42 48 54 60

Soybean based compost

Temperature (°C)

Weed biomass compost 80

Temperature (°C)

80 60 Lsd = 0.05
Lsd = 0.05
60
40
40
20 20

0 0
0 4 7 13 19 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 0 4 7 13 19 24 30 36 42 48 54 60

Composting time (days) Composting time (days)

P1 (PACT-1) means passively aerated composting heap technique

P2 (PACT-2) means passively aerated composting technique in pots
Wdr means Windrow technique

ature that reached a maximum level (60-66°C) as early as in the first 4 days of
composting. This maximum temperature was maintained for almost another
3-5 days, depending on the treatments. Furthermore, the temperature gradually
declined for about a week and then dropped sharply in the following week. At
this stage (after 13 days), turning compost in the conventional windrow system
resulted in an increase in temperature. Thereafter, the temperature gradually
declined and every other turning caused a rise in temperature for a short while.
Furthermore, it was observed that leaf litter and weed biomass composts
 102 JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

maintained a slightly higher temperature than other organic materials during

the composting process. Composts reached maturity within 42-60 days, at
which point the temperature remained almost constant (between 31 and 34°C).
In terms of temperature stabilization, the composts that were prepared from
leaf litter residues matured slightly later than other composts. At 60 days,
the temperature remained higher (34-36°C) than the ambient temperature
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

(31-32°C). The composts that matured within the shortest period were those
prepared from urban waste, weed biomass and soybean residue using either of
the PACT methods. The final maturity stage of the composts was attained be-
tween 36 and 48 days. The results showed that the PACT methods produced a
matured compost faster than the Wdr method.

Compost pH

The pH values at the beginning of composting ranged from 7.3 to 7.7 (Fig-
ure 2). The urban waste showed the lowest pH. As composting proceeded, the
pH decreased slightly and reached minimum level (6.7-7.2) in the first 5 days
of composting. After this initial decline, the composts showed a gradual rise in
pH to a maximum level of about 8.0 for weed biomass, maize waste and urban
wastes, and between 8.0 and 8.5 for soybean based and leaf litter based com-
posts. The decline in pH levels close to the initial values at the beginning of
composting was observed after 42 days for most of the composts.

Nutrient Concentrations in Mature Compost

Concentrations of plant nutrients in the composts as influenced by the type

of organic material and method of composting are presented in Table 2. The
nutrient concentrations varied slightly depending on type of material and to a
lesser extent the method of composting. Total N, organic C and some micro-
nutrients in leaf litter and soybean residue composts were significantly higher
than in the others, while K was found to be higher in weed biomass and maize
residue based composts. The C:N ratio of composts ranged from 13 to 21 and
was lowest in composts made from soybean residues (about 14), followed by
maize residues (about 16). The leaf litter and soybean based composts showed
the highest concentration of P (average of 12.2 g kg⫺1), followed by maize-
based compost containing 11.0 g kg⫺1.
The concentration of K was highest in the compost prepared from maize
residues and was followed by weed plant biomass based compost, with aver-
age values of 15.3 g kg⫺1 and 14.7 g kg⫺1, respectively. The composts, with
the exception of urban waste base, contained substantial values of Ca, Mg and
micronutrients. On the whole, urban waste composts followed by those from
weed biomass had the lowest nutrient values. The correlation coefficient (r)
 Research, Reviews, Practices, Policy and Technology 103

FIGURE 2. Effect of organic waste and method of composting on compost pH

at different composting time.

Maize based compost P1

P2
8.5 Lsd = 0.05 Wdr
8
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

pH

7.5
7
6.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Leaf litter compost

Urban waste compost 8.5 Lsd = 0.05
8 8

pH
7.5 7.5
pH

7
7 Lsd = 0.05
6.5
6.5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Weed biomass compost Soybean based compost

8.5 Lsd = 0.05 8.5 Lsd = 0.05
8
8
pH

7.5
pH

7 7.5

6.5 7
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Composting time (week) Composting time (week)

P1 (PACT-1) means passively aerated composting heap technique

P2 (PACT-2) means passively aerated composting technique in pots
Wdr means Windrow technique

between organic C and N was high (r = 0.82). Between P and organic matter,
the r was 0.69 and between N and P, r was 0.69.

Amaranthus Yield and N Uptake

Effects of the various composts on amaranthus yield are presented in Table 3.

In the first cropping, the highest fresh marketable yield was produced by plants
that received soybean compost prepared by PACT followed by weed biomass
and maize residues. The urban waste gave the lowest yield. The compost made
 104 JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

TABLE 2. Nutrient composition of matured composts as influenced by type of

organic waste and method of composting.

C:N N P K Ca Mg Zn Mn
Treatment g/kg ppm
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

Maize residues PACT-1 15.8c 12.5c 10.8ab 15.7a 30.4b 13.1c 320cd 215e
PACT-2 15.9c 13.2c 11.7a 15.5a 28.6bc 12.8cd 300cd 205e
Wdr 16.4bc 11.0cd 10.4ab 14.6a 30.0b 13.2c 295d 200e
Urban waste PACT-1 19.6a 10.1d 9.2b 11.1b 25.4c 10.6cd 370cd 360c
PACT-2 17.5ab 10.0d 9.7ab 11.7b 25.8c 11.2cd 324cd 400bc
Wdr 18.6ab 11.2cd 9.0b 10.4bc 24.7c 8.9d 330cd 420ab
Weed biomass PACT-1 19.5a 10.5d 8.8b 14.9a 27.4bc 12.3cd 398bc 260d
PACT-2 18.5ab 10.8d 10.7ab 14.7a 30.1b 14.2bc 400bc 270d
Wdr 20.9a 10.5d 8.4b 14.6a 28.8bc 12.8cd 395bc 270d
Leaf litter PACT-1 18.0ab 13.2c 12.4a 13.5ab 38.8a 17.8a 420bc 420ab
PACT-2 16.6bc 13.6c 12.8a 14.2a 40.3a 16.2ab 460ab 400bc
Wdr 20.0a 12.8c 12.0a 13.6ab 37.5a 14.6bc 375bc 405b
Soybean residue PACT-1 13.2d 18.8a 12.6a 10.5bc 37.5a 16.2ab 450ab 400bc
PACT-2 13.4d 19.4a 12.5a 13.2ab 35.3ab 17.3a 510a 460a
Wdr 14.6cd 16.1b 12.4a 10.8bc 38.4a 15.4b 460ab 420ab
The numbers having the same letter along the column are not significantly different at probability level
of 5%
PACT-1 = Passively aerated composting heap technique; PACT-2 = Passively aerated composting tech-
nique in pots; Wdr = Windrow technique

from weed biomass and using PACT-2 gave the highest yield in the second
cropping, but was not significantly different from composts from leaf litter and
soybean residues. Also, with the exception of yields from weed biomass com-
post, yields in the second cropping were generally lower than in the first. On
average, the yields from applying urban waste composts decreased by 31.7 and
30.4% when compared with soybean and leaf litter based composts, respec-
tively, while yield from maize residues based compost decreased, respectively,
by 16.5 and 14.5%. Generally, the use of PACT was superior to Wdr, while the
effects of the former on amaranthus yield were similar.
Application of composts prepared from soybean residues, leaf litter and
weed biomass performed almost similarly and gave significantly higher dry
matter yield than other composts. In contrast to what was recorded for green
weight, there were no significant differences between composting methods ex-
cept for soybean and maize residues, which showed superiority of PACT-2
over the Wdr. The maize and urban wastes gave the least N uptake in both
croppings. The composts from soybean and weed biomass resulted in almost
similar N uptake. On the whole, there was no significant difference in N uptake
between composts prepared by PACT-1 and PACT-2, which in turn performed
better than the Wdr.
 Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

TABLE 3. Effect of compost type and method of composting on amaranthus yield, number and yield of tomato.

Amaranthus Tomato
Green Weight, Dry Weight N Uptake, Fruit Yield,
kg/10 m2 g/plant mg/g No. t/ha
Compost Method I II I II I II I II I II
Maize PACT-1 2.65bc 2.15d 2.84cd 3.60c 54.76cd 71.64de 48c 72ab 17.1b 15.7b
waste PACT-2 3.00b 2.92bc 3.00c 2.94d 58.96c 77.84d 48c 74a 18.0ab 16.0b
Wdr 2.27cd 2.49c 2.68d 3.42c 58.05c 66.95e 52bc 76a 17.0b 17.8ab
Urban PACT-1 2.10d 1.84de 2.89cd 3.27cd 53.62d 51.78g 57ab 65b 13.9c 11.1d
waste PACT-2 2.32c 2.36cd 3.06c 3.26cd 55.03cd 60.8f 54b 62c 14.0c 12.8cd
Wdr 1.95d 2.07d 3.01c 2.77d 46.25e 42.15h 55b 65bc 13.3cd 12.3cd
Weed PACT-1 2.68bc 3.22b 4.56ab 5.36ab 78.55ab 90.45b 60a 60c 16.8b 14.8bc
biomass PACT-2 3.01b 3.95a 4.65ab 5.35ab 78.98a 99.22a 52bc 68b 19.7ab 17.1ab
Wdr 2.32c 3.00bc 4.08b 5.40ab 79.22a 78.38d 55b 61c 20.2a 19.0a
Leaf PACT-1 2.69bc 2.58c 4.01b 5.23ab 77.26ab 83.14c 58ab 52d 12.8d 13.6c
litter PACT-2 2.47c 3.29ab 4.52ab 4.96b 75.44b 88.16bc 56b 64b 12.7d 14.9bc
Wdr 2.00d 1.90de 3.86bc 4.64bc 68.75c 66.05e 63a 61c 17.1b 15.9b
Soybean PACT-1 3.65ab 2.75bc 4.96a 5.20ab 79.34a 93.26b 50bc 66b 16.1bc 13.1c
residue PACT-2 3.90a 3.30ab 4.88a 5.76a 81.08a 95.32ab 61a 65b 17.9ab 15.1bc
Wdr 2.85bc 2.09d 4.90a 5.02b 74.56b 82.64c 56b 64b 21.6a 18.8a
The numbers having the same letter along the column are not significantly different at probability level of 5%
PACT-1 = Passively aerated composting heap technique; PACT-2 = Passively aerated composting technique in pots; Wdr = Windrow technique; I and II = First and
second croppings

105
 106 JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

Tomato Yield

The fruit number and yield of tomato varied with compost type and method
of composting (Table 3). The results showed that compost prepared from
maize residues gave the lowest and highest number of fruit than other com-
posts in the first and second croppings, respectively, and there was no signifi-
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

cant difference between methods of composting.

The numbers of tomato fruit were higher in the second cropping than in the
first. The differences between methods of composting each of soybean resi-
due, maize residue and urban waste were not significant. The fruit yield of to-
mato was lower in the second cropping than in the first cropping (Table 3).
Overall, there was no significant difference in tomato yield between PACT-1
and PACT-2. The composts that were prepared from soybean residue and leaf
litter using Wdr gave significantly higher yield than from other methods. For
maize residue and urban waste, however, the methods showed no significant
differences at both croppings. On the whole, urban waste compost gave signif-
icantly lower yield than other composts.

DISCUSSION

Compost production seems to be a difficult task for many farmers due to the
labour and lack of technical knowledge involved in its preparation. Some
problems are also encountered in the selection of organic waste materials and
the technique of making compost. The type of organic material and the method
of compost preparation are important factors that can lead to making success-
ful compost. The organic materials used in these experiments varied with nu-
trient composition and after composting gave different concentrations of plant
nutrients. The lower C:N ratio with higher N content in poultry manure than
other organic wastes, was an indication that the former could probably be a
good source of protein for the microbes involved in the decomposition of the
organic materials. The use of weed biomass in preparing compost may be of
benefit even in areas where fire poses threat to farms. Making a fire tracing (re-
moval of weeds surrounding a farm to prevent fire outbreak) or clearing bush
for land preparation will provide weed plants that can be of benefit to farmers
when used in composting. This will reduce nutrient losses, improve sanitation
on the farm and encourage organic farming.
The results from our study indicated that the organic wastes that were com-
posted using PACT-2 method decomposed faster than those prepared by Wdr
and PACT-1 methods. This was probably due to thorough mixing of the mate-
rials and provision of a tight cover that conserved moisture and heat, and pre-
vented nutrient leaching from the system. The windrow method could have
produced matured compost if the experiment had been extended for a few
 Research, Reviews, Practices, Policy and Technology 107

more weeks. Turning and watering of the composts in the windrow might have
enhanced the decomposition process but such operations are labor intensive
and might make the method less advantageous in comparison with the PACT
methods, which require minimum watering and no turning.
The temperature regime in the various composts indicated that the organic
wastes passed through almost similar degradation processes independent of
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

the type of material used for composting. During composting, the temperature
pattern of the composts followed similar results obtained in many other com-
posting systems (John et al., 1995; Inbar et al., 1993; Gray et al., 1981). The
general rise in temperature of the compost in the early stage of composting was
caused by rapid mineralization of organic carbon and nitrogen in the presence
of adequate aeration and moisture as required by microbes responsible for the
breakdown of organic compounds. This probably would have generated reac-
tions whereby CO2 and heat were released into the compost system, therefore
raising the temperature in the system (Edwards, 1970; Foth, 1980).
The composts produced from leaf litter, weed biomass and maize residues
matured a little later than soybean and urban wastes, potentially due to higher
C:N ratios in the former materials. Maize residue was a mixture of stalk, cobs
and husks, all of which have high fibre content that may have slowed down
degradation. Overall, the methods of composting and types of organic material
considerably influenced the nutrient composition of composts. The effective-
ness of the compost methods followed in the descending order of PACT-2,
PACT-1 and Wdr. The Wdr was found to be least efficient probably due to nu-
trient losses accrued to the process, which often occur as a result of watering
and ammonia volatilization (FAO, 1987). Soybean contained a moderate C:N
ratio and was characterized by higher nutrient concentration when compared
with other organic wastes. These characteristics might be responsible for its
high effectiveness in producing compost of high quality, which significantly
increased the yields of amaranthus and tomato. Salvator and Sabbe (1995) re-
ported that soybean residue could provide substantial amounts of nutrients
which are highly important when formulating fertilizer programs.
Since all the composts were allowed to mature and cure before use, the ma-
turity factor was not therefore the main cause of the disparity in results be-
tween the treatments obtained on the field. However, if the composts were
used while immature seed germination and crop growth could be inhibited
(Fernando et al., 2000; Gray and Briddlestone, 1981). In this study, the influ-
ence of the compost on crop yield was dependent on the overall quality of the
compost after composting, which might have been affected by the type of or-
ganic waste and method of composting. The time for maturity of compost is
also important. Reduced composting time results in greater quantities of com-
post produced per unit time. The PACT-2 provided a tight enclosed system,
which ensured partial aeration, moisture conservation and controlled leaching
 108 JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

of nutrients. Additionally, the organic materials were shredded and thoroughly

mixed providing more surface area contact with microorganisms than in the
pile systems of Wdr and PACT-1. The higher residual effect of the composts
on tomato compared with amaranthus is likely due to the longer vegetative
growth period of tomato. Thus the tomato crop had greater opportunity to ab-
sorb more available nutrients from compost, which is characteristically a slow
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

release source of nutrients.

CONCLUSION

The nutrient concentrations of the organic wastes used for composting var-
ied with type of material. The maturity of compost was partly influenced by the
C:N ratio content and method used to prepare the compost. The composts pre-
pared by using partially aerated composting techniques (PACT-1 and PACT-2)
matured earlier than by windrow (Wdr). The composts made from soybean
residue and leaf litters were richer in plant nutrients than from maize residues,
weed biomass and urban waste, and showed increased N uptake, dry matter
yield and fresh marketable yield of amaranthus. On the other hand, the com-
post from maize, weed biomass and soybean residues resulted in greater pro-
ductivity. PACT-1 and PACT-2 similarly affected crop yield. With the exception
of soybean and weed biomass based compost used on tomato in the second
cropping, the least effect was obtained from the Wdr. In general, the composts
resulted in increased yield of both crops, and inclusion of the compost materi-
als in organic waste recycling enhances sustainable production of vegetable
crops.

REFERENCES

Edwards, J.H., 1970. Recycling Newsprint in Agriculture. Biocycle 7 (33): 70.

FAO, 1987. Soil management: compost production and use in tropical and subtropical
environments. FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations, Rome,
FAO Soil Bulletin 56, 177 p.
Foth, H.O., 1980. Fundamentals of Soil Science. John Wiley and Sons Inc. Canada,
157-166.
Fernando, M., Murillo, J.M., Lopez, R. & Cabrera, F., 2000. Use of urea to correct im-
mature urban composts for agricultural purposes. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 31
(15&16): 2635-2649.
Gray, K.R. & Briddlestone, A.J., 1981. The composting of agricultural wastes. In: B.
Stonehouse (ed.). Biological Husbandary. Butterworths Publications, London, Eng-
land. pp. 99-112.
Inbar, Y., Hadar, Y. & Chen, Y., 1993. Recycling of cattle manure: The composting
process and characterization of maturity. J Environ Qual 22: 857-863.
 Research, Reviews, Practices, Policy and Technology 109

John, N.M., Adeoye, G.O. & Shridhar, M.K.C., 1995. Effect of a binding agent and
sawdust amendment on the stabilization of compost, soil properties and crop
growth. In: Agboola et al. (eds). Proceedings of the 23rd All African Soil Science
Conference, pp. 383-394. Ibadan. August 29-September 2, 1995.
Lombin, L.G., Adepetu, J.A. & Ayotade, K. A., 1994. Complementary use of organic
manures and inorganic fertilizers in arable production. In: Lombin et al. (eds). Or-
Downloaded by [University of Colorado at Boulder Libraries] at 22:50 28 December 2014

ganic Fertilizers in the Nigerian Agriculture: Present and Future. Proceedings of a

National Organic Fertilizer Seminar Kaduna, Nigeria, 26-27 March, 1994.
N’Dayegamiye, A., Royer, R. & Audesse, P., 1997. Nitrogen mineralization and avail-
ability in manure composts from Quebec biological farms. Can. J. Soil Sci. 77 (3):
345-350.
Parr, J.F., Papendick, R.I. & Colacicco, D., 1986. Recycling of organic wastes for a
sustainable agriculture. Biological Agriculture and Horticulture 3: 115-130.
Parr, J.F., Miller, R.H. & Colacicco, D., 1984. Utilization of organic materials for crop
production in developed countries. In: Organic Farming. Current Technology and
Its Role in a Sustainable Agriculture. ASA Special Publication No. 46. American
Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI.
Salvator, K. & Sabbe, W.E., 1995. Evaluation of fertilizer value and nutrient release
from corn and soybean residues under laboratory and greenhouse conditions.
Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 26 (3&4): 469-484.
Saviozzi, A., Levi-Minzi, R. & Riffaldi, R., 1988. Maturity evaluation of organic
wastes. BioCycle 29: 54-56.
SAS, 1985. User’s Guide: Statistics version 5 edition. Statistical Analysis System In-
stitute Inc. Cary, NC.
Taiwo, L.B., 1997. Development of organic-based fertilizer from sorted urban wastes.
PhD Thesis, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria. 205 pp.
Tandon, H.L.S., 1992. Components of integrated plant nutrition. In: Tandon H.L.S.
(ed.) Organic Manures, Recycliable Wastes and Biofertilizers. Fertilizer Develop-
ment and Consultation Organization 204, Bhanot Corner 1-2, Pamposh Enclave,
New Delhi, India. 148 pp.
Tian, G., Kang, B.T. & Brussard, I., 1992. Biological effects of plant residues with
contrasting chemical composition under humid tropical conditions. Decomposition
and nutrient release. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 24: 1051-1060.
Zucconi, F., Forte, M., Monaco, A. & de Bertoldi, M., 1981. Biological evaluation of
compost maturity. BioCycle 22: 27-29.

RECEIVED: 11/16/01
REVISED: 06/17/02
ACCEPTED: 07/11/02