Greenhouse gas emissions from selected horticultural production systemsKaitlin Lloyd & Dr. Chandra A. MadramootooDept. Bioresource EngineeringMcGill UniversityAugust 13, 2018ICID GHG Workshop 2018

Objectives

´ Evaluate N2O, CO2, and CH4 fluxes and emissions from three horticultural production systems under different soil types.´ Cranberry – Sandy soil´ Tomato – Loamy sand soil´ Onion – Organic soil

´ Assess the impact of environmental conditions and agricultural management practices on GHG fluxes/emissions´ Soil moisture, soil temperature, rainfall,

irrigation

2

St.LouisdeBlandford(cranberry)

Sherrington(onion)

Leamington(Tomato)

Study sites locations3

Cranberries (2012-2013)Saint-Louis-de-Blandford

0 21km

P5P4

P3P2

P1

M5M4

M3M2

M1

Water management:

1- High water table2- Low water table

Sandy soil

4

Tomatoes (2012-2013)Leamington

Water management:

1- Surface drip irr.2- Subsurface drip irr.

Loamy sand soil

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

"

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

10

Treatment:SSTreatment:SD

0 10050m

5

Onions (2012-2015)Sherrington

Water management:

1- Sprinkler irrigation

Organic soil

6

Soil properties

Crop Year Field Soil type Soil organic matter

(%)

Porosity

Cranberry 2013 1 Sand 3.4 0.47

Tomato 2013 1 Loamy

sand

3.1 0.34

Onion 2013 1 Organic 83 0.74

7

Agricultural practices

Crop Year Seeding

date

Fertilizer

date

N application

(kg N ha-1)

Harvest date

Cranberry 2013 N/A Jun./Jul. 50 Sep. 14/Oct. 5

Tomato 2013 May 29 May/Jun 195 Sep. 17/Sep. 13

Onion 2013 May 3 May 1 90 Oct. 1

8

Data collection9

- Greenhouse gases (N2O, CO2 and CH4)- Soil temperature- Soil moisture- Rainfall

Results10

N2O Fluxes (2013)

0

300

600

900

1,200

1,500

1,800

2,100

17-Mar-13 06-May-13 25-Jun-13 14-Aug-13 03-Oct-13 22-Nov-13

N2O

Flu

xes

(µg

N2O

-N m

-2h-

1 )

CranberryTomatoOnion

11

N2O Emissions

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2012 2013 2014 2015

N2O

em

issio

ns(k

g N

2O-N

ha-

1 ) OnionCranberry-HWTCranberry-LWTTomato-SDITomato-SUR

12

CO2 Fluxes (2013)

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

17-Mar-13 06-May-13 25-Jun-13 14-Aug-13 03-Oct-13 22-Nov-13

CO

2flu

xes

(µg

CO

2-C

m-2

h-1 )

CranberryOnionTomato

13

CO2 Emissions14

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

2012 2013 2014 2015

CO

2em

issio

ns

(kg

CO

2-C

ha-

1 )

Onion

Cranberry-HWT

Cranberry-LWT

Tomato-SDI

Tomato-SUR

CH4 Fluxes (2013)

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

17-Mar-13 06-May-13 25-Jun-13 14-Aug-13 03-Oct-13 22-Nov-13

CH 4

Flux

es

(µg

CH 4

-C m

-2h-

1 )

OnionCranberryTomato

15

CH4 Emissions16

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

2012 2013 2014 2015

CH 4

emiss

ions

(k

g C

H 4-C

ha-

1 )

OnionCranberry-High water tableCranberry-Low water tableTomato-Subsurface dripTomato-Surface drip

Global warming potential

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

2012 2013 2014 2015

Glo

bal w

arm

ing

pote

ntia

l(k

g C

O2-

eqha

-1)

OnionCranberry-HWTCranberry-LWTTomato-SDITomato-SUR

17

Conclusions´ N2O fluxes:

´ Spring thaw, application of inorganic fertilizers, soil moisture, rainfall

´ CO2 fluxes:

´ Soil temperature, soil organic matter, porosity

´ CH4 fluxes:

´ Flooding

´ Cumulative emissions:

´ Small variations between crops explained by inorganic fertilizer application and soil properties

´ Differences between mineral and organic were insignificant

´ Differences between water management treatments were statistically insignificant

18

Thank you.19

Outline

´ Objectives ´ Study sites´ Data collection´ Results´ Conclusions

20

Study sitesCranberry, Saint-Louis-de-Blandford, QC (2012-2013)Tomato, Leamington, ON (2012-2013)Onion, Sherrington, QC (2012-2015)

21