Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-x4r87 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T13:46:49.828Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Economic Returns from Reducing Poultry Litter Phosphorus with Microbial Phytase

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

Darrell J. Bosch ,
Minkang Zhu  and
Ervin T. Kornegay
Darrell J. Bosch
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg
Minkang Zhu
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg
Ervin T. Kornegay
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Poultry Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg
Get access

Abstract

Requiring that crop applications of manure be based on phosphorus content (P-standard) could increase poultry litter disposal costs. Microbial phytase reduces litter P content and could reduce litter disposal costs under a P-standard. For a representative Virginia turkey farm, phytase costs $2,500 and could increase value of litter used for fertilizer on the turkey farm by $390 and reduce supplemental P feed costs by $1,431. Based on assumed litter demand and supply, estimated litter export prices with phytase could exceed export prices without phytase by $3.81 per ton. Phytase net returns to the farm are an estimated $1,435.

Keywords

economic returnsmicrobial phytasenutrient managementphosphoruspoultry litterwater quality
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , December 1997 , pp. 255 - 266
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bosch, D.J., and Napit, K.B.. “The Economic Potential for More Effective Poultry Litter Use in Virginia.” Pub. No. SP-91-11, Dept. of Agr. and Appl. Econ., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, 1991.Google Scholar
Bosch, D.J., and Napit, K.B.. “Economics of Transporting Poultry Litter to Achieve More Effective Use as Fertilizer.” J. Soil and Water Conserv. 47(1992):342-46.Google Scholar
Duval, M. “Formulating Broiler and Turkey Diets with Natuphos Phytase.” In BASF Technical Symposium Proceedings, pp. 94–109. Mount Olive NJ: BASF Corporation, December 1996.Google Scholar
Fisher, T.R., and Butt, A.J.. “The Role of Nitrogen and Phosphorus in Chesapeake Bay Anoxia.” In Perspectives on Chesapeake Bay, 1994: Advances in Estuarine Sciences, eds., Nelson, S. and Elliott, P., pp. 1–43. Solomons Island MD: The Chesapeake Bay Program, December 1994.Google Scholar
Fox, D.G., Ritchie, H.D., and Black, J.R.. “Feed Composition Values.” AS Fact Sheet No. 1102, Virginia Coop. Ext. Ser., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg [no date].Google Scholar
Gerken, H.J. Personal communication. Dept. of Animal and Poultry Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, 1990.Google Scholar
Kenyon, D.E. “General Permit Requirements for Confined Animal Feeding Operations in Virginia.” Pub. No. 446-049, Virginia Coop. Ext. Ser., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, 1995.Google Scholar
Kornegay, E.T. “Using Microbial Phytase to Improve the Bioavailability of Phosphorus, Calcium, Zinc, and Amino Acids in Swine and Poultry Diets.” In BASF Technical Symposium, Pacific Northwest Animal Nutrition Conference, pp. 68–106. Mount Olive NJ: BASF Corporation, 1996.Google Scholar
Kornegay, E.T., and Denbow, D.M.. Unpublished data. Dept. of Animal and Poultry Sciences, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, 1997.Google Scholar
Kornegay, E.T., Denbow, D.M., Yi, Z., and Ravindran, V.. “Response of Broilers to Graded Levels of Microbial Phytase Added to Maize-Soya-bean-Meal-Based Diets Containing Three Levels of Non-Phytate Phosphorus.” Brit. J. Nutrition 75(1996):839-52.Google Scholar
Messick, J.K. Personal communication. Agronomist, Agronomic Div., North Carolina Department of Agriculture, Raleigh, 1996.Google Scholar
Michigan Agriculture Commission. “Generally Accepted Agricultural and Management Practices for Manure Management and Utilization.” Michigan Department of Agriculture, Lansing, June 1995.Google Scholar
Moore, J.M., and White, H.E.. Digestible Nutrient and Carrying Capacities of Various Pastures. Pub. No. 887, Virginia Coop. Ext. Sen, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, 1980.Google Scholar
National Research Council. Soil and Water Quality: An Agenda for Agriculture. Washington DC: National Academy Press, 1993.Google Scholar
Parr, J. “Formulating Layer Diets with Natuphos Phytase.” In BASF Technical Symposium Proceedings, pp. 84–93. Mount Olive, NJ: BASF Corporation, December 1996.Google Scholar
Parsons, R.L. “Financial Costs and Economic Tradeoffs of Alternative Manure Management Policies on Dairy and Dairy/Poultry Farms in Rockingham County, Virginia.” Ph.D. dissertation, Dept. of Agr. and Appl. Econ., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, October 1995.Google Scholar
Piepenhagen, K., and Kenyon, D.E.. “The Right-to-Farm Legislation and County Zoning Ordinances.” Pub. No. 448-224/REAP R026, Virginia Coop. Ext. Ser., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, 1996.Google Scholar
Ravindran, V., Ravindran, G., and Sivalogan, S.. “Total and Phytase Phosphorus Contents of Various Foods and Feedstuffs of Plant Origin.” Food Chemistry 50(1994):133-36.Google Scholar
Sharpley, A., Daniel, T.C., Sims, J.T., and Pote, D.H.. “Determining Environmentally Sound Soil Phosphorus Levels.” J. Soil and Water Conserv. 51,2(March-April 1996):160-66.Google Scholar
Sims, J.T. “Nitrogen Transformations in a Poultry Manure Amended Soil: Temperature and Moisture Effects.” J. Environ. Quality 14(1986):59–63.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1992.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Commerce. 1992 Census of Agriculture. Pub. No. AC92-A-46, Bureau of the Census, Economic and Statistics Administration. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, April 1994.Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control Program: Program Development and Approval Guidance. Pub. No. 841-B-93-003, Office of Water. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, January 1993a.Google Scholar
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance Specifying Management Measures for Sources of Nonpoint Pollution in Coastal Waters. Pub. No. 840-B-92-002, Office of Water. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, June 1993b.Google Scholar
Virginia Cooperative Extension Farm Management Staff. “Virginia Farm Management Crop and Livestock Enterprise Budgets 1995.” Pub. No. 446-047, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, 1995.Google Scholar
Virginia Cooperative Extension Service. A Handbook of Agronomy. Pub. No. 424-100, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, September 1984.Google Scholar
Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. 1994 Virginia Agricultural Statistics. Bull. No. 66, Virginia Agricultural Statistics Service, Richmond, September 1995.Google Scholar
Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation. Nutrient Management Handbook. Division of Soil and Water Conservation, Richmond, March 1991.Google Scholar
Yi, Z., Kornegay, E.T., and Denbow, D.M.. “Effect of Microbial Phytase on Nitrogen and Amino Acid Digestibility and Nitrogen Retention of Turkey Poults Fed Corn-Soybean Meal Diets.” Poultry Sci. 75(1996):979-90.Google Scholar