<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJSS</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Soil Science</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2162-5360</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojss.2022.126009</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJSS-118011</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Utilization of Compost as a Soil Amendment to Increase Soil Health and to Improve Crop Yields
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Jerome</surname><given-names>Wright</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Scott</surname><given-names>Kenner</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bret</surname><given-names>Lingwall</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Department of Civil Engineering, South Dakota Mines, Rapid City, USA</addr-line></aff><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>17</day><month>06</month><year>2022</year></pub-date><volume>12</volume><issue>06</issue><fpage>216</fpage><lpage>224</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>6,</day>	<month>May</month>	<year>2022</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>21,</day>	<month>June</month>	<year>2022</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>24,</day>	<month>June</month>	<year>2022</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  Compost amendments have remarkable potential for improving soil structure, porosity and water holding capacity. Soil health is the ability to function as a living system, to sustain plant and animal productivity, to enhance water and air quality, and to promote plant and animal health. Soil health can be estimated by measuring the total living microbial biomass, retained carbon, odor, and texture. Poor or deteriorating soil health is threatening food security. The potential for compost to reverse these negative trends is transformative if means and methods for large scale composting and compost amendments can be developed. A field-scale compost soil amendment project was implemented in Rapid City, South Dakota. The compost was added to a soil plot at 5 wt% and 10 wt% and the results were compared with an adjacent untreated plot without any compost addition. Measurements of soil health characteristics indicate that compost amendments improve soil health, crop yields, and soil water content. Treating soils with compost has the potential to reverse global deteriorating soil health.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Compost</kwd><kwd> Crop Yields</kwd><kwd> Soil Health</kwd><kwd> Food Security</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>Addition of compost to soil increases soil porosity, water holding capacity and organic content. These changes are collectively known as the “soil structure”. With international and national concern about the world’s soil being lost through erosion and the remaining soil experiencing deteriorating soil health, compost amendments may assist significantly in improving overall soil health and increasing food security [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref1">1</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref2">2</xref>]. There has been a surge in international awareness of the need to maintain and develop healthy soils and to maximize food production, in quality and quantity. Healthier soils created by the incorporation of compost will increase the amount of carbon sequestered which could be a leading method to mitigate global warming. Large-scale composting and incorporating the compost into soils helps to greater sustainability of our soils, to maintain our forests, and to protect our waters [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref3">3</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref4">4</xref>].</p><p>Soil porosity and organic matter content play a critical role in the biological productivity and hydrology of agricultural soils.Pores are of different size,shape,and continuity and these characteristics influence the infiltration,storage and drainage of water,the movement and distribution of gases,and the ease of penetration of soil by growing roots [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref5">5</xref>].</p><p>Soil health is the soil’s ability to function as a living system, to enhance water and air quality, and to promote plant and animal health. Soil health can be estimated by measuring the total living microbial biomass, retained carbon, odor, and structure. Soil organisms illustrate cause and effect that link land management and the ultimate productivity and health of the plants and animals [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref6">6</xref>]. Disease control is also an indicator of soil health and can be viewed as a manifestation of ecosystem stability and health [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref7">7</xref>].</p><p>The health of a soil is dependent on the maintenance of four major functions; carbon transformations; nutrient cycles; soil structure maintenance; and the regulation of pests and diseases [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref8">8</xref>]. Quantification of soil health is measured by analyzing these four major functions. Soil quality is essential for sustainable agriculture and soil health is expressed in crop quality not quantity [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref9">9</xref>].</p><p>When a soil is healthy it has structural porosity, nutrient availability, and organic content which allow the soil to breathe and absorb water. Healthy soil has a loose texture allowing roots to easily penetrate the soil matrix and access water and nutrients. By understanding the stress that the plant is undergoing, best management practices can be developed to close the gap between the plant’s yield and its genetic yield potential, thus supporting worldwide food security [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref10">10</xref>].</p><p>Recent awareness that soil health is vital to food production and the global ecosystems has increased awareness in the status of the soil and how it can be improved [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref11">11</xref>]. Soil structure and health can be renewed or improved by re-introducing porosity, organic matter, and nutrient availability through no-till farming, conservation agriculture and incorporation of compost [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref3">3</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref12">12</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref13">13</xref>]. To increase soil organic matter and other nutrients in the soil of cultivated land, the integrated implementation of land management through compost, cover crops, manures, minimum tillage, crop rotation, and liming to decrease soil acidity are suggested [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref14">14</xref>]. Agricultural waste for soil amendment is limited in developing countries as competition for the use of agricultural waste for use as fuel and feed is dominant. Composted municipal solid waste should also be utilized as a soil amendment [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref15">15</xref>].</p><p>Compost is developed using the natural decomposition process of organic matter, by managing and applying appropriate amounts of moisture, air, and feedstock. Compost is stable and provides humus to the soil [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref16">16</xref>]. The composting process produces a soil amendment with an acceptable carbon nitrogen ratio, safe levels of pathogens, a relatively balanced pH, and stable in its respiratory rate [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref17">17</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref18">18</xref>]. The purpose of composting is to change organic waste material into a stable and usable product, called compost that can be amended into soils [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref19">19</xref>]. Soil amended with compost will improve soil aggregation and the root zone environment [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref20">20</xref>]. “While there is not a consensus on exactly how to measure soil quality, there is little disagreement that organic matter content gives soils many of their desirable properties” [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref21">21</xref>]. Soil organic matter is important determinant of available water content because, on a volume basis, it is a significant component. One to 6% organic matter, by weight, is equivalent to approximately 5% to 25% by volume [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref22">22</xref>]. One of the cheapest forms of conservation is soil amendment with compost, which can cut summer irrigation demands in half [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref23">23</xref>]. Soil health is a combination of physical, chemical and biological properties that impact the function and productivity of the soil with several of these characteristics directly impacting the economics [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref24">24</xref>]. Three terms related to the water budget are field capacity (FC), wilting point (WP) and available water (AW) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref25">25</xref>]. Compost increases water holding capacity and total porosity [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref26">26</xref>]. Increased water holding capacity increases the available water content. Compost addition is more effective than tilling by reducing the soil strength and compaction and increasing soil infiltration [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref26">26</xref>]. Research indicates that water holding capacity is greatly increased by adding organic matter to soil [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref27">27</xref>]. Research has shown that incorporation of yard waste compost decreased soil bulk density compared to non-tilled treatment, and the compost treatment increased soil carbon, nitrogen contents and plant available water [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref28">28</xref>]. Use of mulch and soil conditioners has shown to improve efficiency of water use by reducing evaporation, improving water infiltration and storage, and reducing deep drainage [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref29">29</xref>]. Particle size and particle size distribution, as they contribute to porosity and water retention, has been studied [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref30">30</xref>]. Research indicates that compost added to a soil stimulates microbial growth and activity, may change species composition in the soil, promotes earthworms, and may suppress plant disease. Greater microbial biomass increases availability of nutrients to plants and promotes formation of soil aggregates and structure [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref31">31</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref32">32</xref>]. Researchers have studied the control of soil borne plant pathogens with composts [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref32">32</xref>].</p><p>In 2003 the United States Compost Council adopted the Seal of Testing Assurance (STA) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref33">33</xref>] to establish standards for determining compost quality. Research was performed to the potential for improving soil health through the use of compost as a soil amendment [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref34">34</xref>]. The purpose of the research was to determine if irrigation water would be conserved when soils are amended with compost. Increases in soil health parameters were also observed.</p></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Methods</title><p>A 4756 m<sup>2</sup> field was developed into two 2090 m<sup>2</sup> fields that could be uniformly irrigated. One field was controlled, with no compost (NC) and one field had compost incorporated into the soil. The in-situ soil density used for calculating the addition of compost was 92.4 lb./ft<sup>3</sup> (1480.1 kg/m<sup>3</sup>). The only variable was the amount of compost amended into the upper 8-inches (200-mm) of soil. The amendments were determined to be 5% and 10% by weight of the in-situ soil. The treated field was divided with half receiving 10% compost and the half receiving 5% compost. Compost was added to a depth of 8-inches (203 mm). The compost for the 5% plot was 18.6 U.S. tons (16.87 metric ton) and compost for the 10% plot was 37 U.S. tons (33.57 metric ton).</p><p>Irrigation occurred when natural precipitation did not maintain field moisture above the wilt point of 20 percent soil moisture. The wilting point is the amount of water per unit weight or per unit bulk volume in the soil, expressed in percentage, that is held so tightly by the soil matrix that roots cannot absorb this water and plant will wilt [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref35">35</xref>] [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref36">36</xref>]. The wilting point for a clay loam is estimated at 20% [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref36">36</xref>].</p><p>Data collection included measured precipitation and irrigation, water content at 0'' - 8'' (0 mm to 203 mm), 8'' - 16'' (203 mm to 406 mm) and 16'' - 24'' (406 mm to 610 mm) depths. Surface soil moisture contents at 0 to 8-inch (0 to 203 mm) depth were taken at 45-degree quadrants, at 10-foot (3.05 m) intervals, with seven intervals, 10 ft (3.05 m) to 70 ft (21.34 m) Moisture content readings were also taken for soil depths of 0'' - 8'' (0 mm to 203 mm), 8'' - 16'' (203 mm to 406 mm) and 16'' - 24'' (406 mm to 610 mm) at on-site wells. There were six well nests in the no compost (NC) field and six well nests in the compost field. Locations were at the 45, 90, 135, 225, 270, and 315-degree quadrants at a radius of 30 feet (9.1 m). A portable Hydro Sense II moisture instrument, from Campbell Scientific, Inc. of Logan, Utah, was used for measuring volumetric water content of soil.</p><p>Random soil samples were taken and sent to the North Dakota State University Soils Lab. The surface soil was found to be a silty loam. An onsite soil sample was analyzed using the Guideline to texture (soil) by feel, USDA NRCS [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref37">37</xref>] and the soil was determined to be silt-loam. The microbial activity of the soil was measured using total living microbial biomass, Phospholipid Fatty Acid (PLFA), testing was conducted by Ward Laboratories of Kearney, Nebraska.</p></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Materials</title><p>The City of Rapid City conducts compost testing to comply with the EPA standards for Class A compost [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref38">38</xref>]. Class A compost can be applied anywhere and for any plant. The Soil Control Laboratory of Watsonville, California conduct compost quality testing in accordance with the U. S. Compost Council’s Testing for Quality Assurance (STA) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref33">33</xref>]. The analysis of the compost applied is described in detail in the dissertation of Dr. Wright [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref34">34</xref>].</p><p>The fields were seeded with a reclamation seed mix. The seed mixture went to the no-compost field and the compost field at equal rates of 50 lbs (22.7 kg) each field. Fifty pounds (22.7 kg) of 18-46-0 (Nitrogen-Potassium-Phosphorus) fertilizer was equally applied to each field. All fields received equal machine work.</p></sec><sec id="s4"><title>4. Results</title><p>Porosity tests show the 0% compost at 46.5%, the 5% at 50%, and the 10% at 52%, for a difference of a +5.5% porosity in a silty clay loam when amended with compost by 10% by weight. Infiltration tests were conducted in the field using a double ring infiltration system, with the infiltration rates being 10.93 in/h (278 mm/h) for the 0% compost, 16.44 in/h (418 mm/h) for the 5% composted soil, and 38.44 in/h (976 mm/h) for the 10% composted soil. The infiltration rate was increased by 150% when 5% compost was added and increased by 351% when 10% compost was added [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref35">35</xref>].</p><p>In 2018 sampling, the 10% compost soils improved soil carbon by 32%, total living mass by 70% and crop yield by 115%. In 2019 sampling, the 10% compost soils improved soil carbon by 48%, total living mass by 32% and crop yield by 30%. In 2020 sampling, the 10% soils improved soil carbon by 127%, total living mass by 106% and crop yield by 61%. Results are at <xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref>.</p><p>Soil chemistry data suggests that the use of compost is beneficial in providing nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium to the soil. Results are shown in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref>.</p><p>Soil microbial results are summarized in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref>. Soil microbial biomass generally comprises less than 5% of organic matter in soil but performs at least 3 critical functions of soil and the environment. 1) It is a reliable source of carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulfur; 2) it is an immediate sink of carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulfur; and 3) and it is an agent of nutrient transformation and pesticide degradation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref39">39</xref>]. Microorganisms form symbiotic associations with roots, act as biological agents against plant pathogens, contribute towards soil aggregation and participate in soil formation [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref39">39</xref>].</p><p>The results of crop yield rates are in <xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref>.</p><p>The visual health and vitality of the plants appeared much higher in the 10% soil area when compared to the no compost (NC) or the 5% soil area. In 2018, the no compost (NC) field had an estimated 25% infestation of buffalo bur (Solanum rostratum) weeds. The compost fields show a minimal amount of infestation estimated at 1% - 2% by area.</p><p>Compost incorporation improved total carbon content, biomass population, soil texture and appearance. Results are shown at <xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref>.</p><table-wrap id="table1" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table1">Table 1</xref></label><caption><title> Total carbon by soil type and depth</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Soil Blend</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Depth (inches)</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Total Carbon % August 2018</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >OM %* Aug 2018</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Total Carbon % August 2019</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >OM % Aug 2019</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Total Carbon % August 2020</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >OM % Aug 2020</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >NC No compost</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0 - 8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.7</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >8 - 16</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >16 - 24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >5%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0 - 8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.0</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9.8</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >8 - 16</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.2</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >16 - 24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >10%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0 - 8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7.4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >14.3</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >8 - 16</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.3</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.8</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5.4</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >16 - 24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.5</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2.7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.6</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>*Soil organic matter (OM) expressed as a percent of total.</p><table-wrap id="table2" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table2">Table 2</xref></label><caption><title> Soil chemistry by soil type and the top 8 inches (203 mm) depth</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Soil Blend</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >August 2017</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >August 2018</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >August 2019</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >July 2020</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >Conductivity ECC m ohms/cm</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >NC</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.78</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.45</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.31</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.38</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >5%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.1</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.73</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.33</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.51</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >10%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1.7</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.89</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.51</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0.64</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Total Nitrogen N ppm</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >NC</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >103</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NA</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >12</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >37</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >5%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >36</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NA</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >16</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >89</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >10%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >44</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >NA</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >87</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >207</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Total Phosphorous P ppm</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >NC</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >13</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >5%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >24</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >28</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >56</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >10%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >50</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >47</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >31</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >116</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="2"  >Total Potassium K ppm</td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td><td align="center" valign="middle" ></td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >NC</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >380</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >320</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >299</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >735</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >5%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >390</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >384</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >337</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1085</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >10%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >670</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >530</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >485</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1100</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table3" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table3">Table 3</xref></label><caption><title> Biological Soil Analysis (0 - 200 mm) 2 years after amendment</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="2"  ></th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >NC No Compost</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >5% Compost</th><th align="center" valign="middle"  colspan="3"  >10% Compost</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2018</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2019</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2020</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2018</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2019</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2020</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2018</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2019</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2020</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total Bacteria</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2644</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4367</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2594</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3500</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4716</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3678</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4224</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5178</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5601</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total Fungi</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >736</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1031</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >901</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1161</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1390</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >870</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1589</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1502</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1863</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Protazoa</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >105</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >41</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >46</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >109</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >56</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >22</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >182</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >40</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >56</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Undifferentiated</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1546</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2516</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1794</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2227</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3066</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >1194</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2563</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3744</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3516</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >Total Living Biomass</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5031</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7955</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5335</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6997</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >9228</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >5764</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >8558</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10,465</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >11,036</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table4" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table4">Table 4</xref></label><caption><title> Year 2018-2020 crop yield field data based on wet weight</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" >Field</th><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >0% Baseline</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >5%</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >10%</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle"  rowspan="3"  >Average Yield Difference by Mass</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >2018</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >+39%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >+115%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2019</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >+1%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >+30%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >2020</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >+15%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >+61%</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><table-wrap id="table5" ><label><xref ref-type="table" rid="table5">Table 5</xref></label><caption><title> Average total carbon and living biomass 2018-2020 over the upper 200-mm of soil</title></caption><table><tbody><thead><tr><th align="center" valign="middle" ></th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Total carbon % by weight</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >Total living mass (PLFA), ng/g</th><th align="center" valign="middle" >% Increase Total C Total Biomass</th></tr></thead><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >No compost (NC)</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >3.5%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6107</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >N/A N/A</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >5% compost</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >4.7%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >7329</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >+34% +19%</td></tr><tr><td align="center" valign="middle" >10% compost</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >6.0%</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >10,020</td><td align="center" valign="middle" >+71% +62%</td></tr></tbody></table></table-wrap><p>Adoption of improved tillage and residue management improves soil health. Increasing soil organic matter improves water holding capacity, improves soil structure, increases nutrient exchange, helps soil adjust to resist drastic pH changes, and increases nutrient availability [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.118011-ref40">40</xref>].</p></sec><sec id="s5"><title>5. Discussion</title><p>Incorporation of compost into agricultural soil has shown a significant benefit in improving the soil in several key aspects of soil health. Increased infiltration rates, higher moisture content, higher total carbon, higher total biomass, and higher yields indicate sizable benefits from the incorporation of compost into soil. Composting organic wastes reduce the tonnage a community landfill, and can reduce the carbon footprint if composted on-site. Utilization of compost as a soil amendment provides a very beneficial use of the compost product beyond simple mulching. In this study, three years of data from a field scale experiment strongly show that all key measures of soil health were increased by soil compost amendments, and that the benefits scale with increasing compost amounts. Key to this study was the mixing of compost into the soil rather than using it as a mulch. This direct incorporation into the soil matrix serves a different purpose than mulching and can be used in connection with mulching for enhanced performance and even better soil health outcomes. Perhaps most impressive were the long-term increases in N/P/K concentrations showing that composting is a viable means to reduce need for agricultural producers and homeowners to supplement with N/P/K fertilizers.</p></sec><sec id="s6"><title>Acknowledgements</title><p>A special thank you is extended to the Solid Waste Division and the Water Reclamation Division, Department of Public Works, City of Rapid City, Rapid City, South Dakota, USA for their material and resource support. The support allowed detailed study and observation possible.</p></sec><sec id="s7"><title>Conflicts of Interest</title><p>The authors declare no conflicts of interest.</p></sec><sec id="s8"><title>Cite this paper</title><p>Wright, J., Kenner, S. and Lingwall, B. (2022) Utilization of Compost as a Soil Amendment to Increase Soil Health and to Improve Crop Yields. Open Journal of Soil Science, 12, 216-224. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojss.2022.126009</p></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.118011-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Doran, J.W. (1996) Soil Health and Global Sustainability. Soil Quality Is in the Hands of the Land Manager.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hobbs, P.R. (2007) Conservation Agriculture: What Is It and Why Is It Important for Future Sustainable Food Production? The Journal of Agricultural Science, 145, 127-137. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021859607006892</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">King, R.B. (1992) Overview and Bibliography of Methods for Evaluating the Surface-Water-Infiltration Component of the Rainfall Runoff Process. U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 92-4095, 170 p.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Naeini, S.M. and Cook, H. (2000) Influence of Municipal Waste Compost Amendment on Soil Water and Evaporation. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 31, 3147-3161. https://doi.org/10.1080/00103620009370657</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kay, B.D. and Vanden-Bygaart, A.J. (2002) Conservation Tillage and Depth Stratification of Porosity and Soil Organic Matter. Soil and Tillage Research, 66, 107-118. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-1987(02)00019-3</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Doran, J.W. and Zeiss, M.R. (2000) Soil Health and Sustainability: Managing the Biotic Component of Soil Quality. Applied Soil Ecology, 15, 3-11. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0929-1393(00)00067-6</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Van Bruggen, A.H. and Semenov, A.M. (2000) In Search of Biological Indicators for Soil Health and Disease Suppression. Applied Soil Ecology, 15, 13-24. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0929-1393(00)00068-8</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kibblewhite, M., Ritz, K. and Swift, M. (2008) Soil Health in Agricultural Systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 363, 685-701. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2178</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Warkentin</surname><given-names> B.P. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1995</year>)<article-title>The Changing Concept of Soil Quality</article-title><source> Journal of Soil and Water Conservation</source><volume> 50</volume>,<fpage> 226</fpage>-<lpage>228</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Clay, D., et al. (2001) Factors Influencing Spatial Variability of Soil Apparent Electrical Conductivity. Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 32, 2993-3008. https://doi.org/10.1081/CSS-120001102</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Doran, J. (2002) Soil Health and Global Sustainability: Translating Science into Practice. Ecosystems &amp; Environment, 88, 119-122.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8809(01)00246-8</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pit, R.E., Lantrip, J., Harrison, R., et al. (1999) Infiltration through Disturbed Urban Soils and Compost-Amended Soil Effects on Runoff Quality and Quantity. USEPA, Cincinnati, OH.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Aggelides, S.M. and Londra, P.A. (2000) Effects of Compost Produced from Town Wastes and Sewage Sludge on the Physical Properties of a Loamy and a Clay Soil. Bioresource Technology, 71, 253-259.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(99)00074-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Adugna</surname><given-names> G. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2016</year>)<article-title>A Review on Impact of Compost on Soil Properties, Water Use and Crop Productivity</article-title><source> Academic Research Journal of Agricultural Science and Research</source><volume> 4</volume>,<fpage> 93</fpage>-<lpage>104</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Nigussie, A., Kuyper, T.W. and de Neergaard, A. (2015) Agricultural Waste Utilisation Strategies and Demand for Urban Waste Compost: Evidence from Smallholder Farmers in Ethiopia. Waste Management, 44, 82-93. 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.07.038</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Cooperband, L.R. (2000) Composting: Art and Science of Organic Waste Conversion to a Valuable Soil Resource. Laboratory Medicine, 31, 283-290. 
https://doi.org/10.1309/W286-LQF1-R2M2-1WNT</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Stoffella, P.J. and Kahn, B.A. (2001) Compost Utilization in Horticultural Cropping Systems. CRC Press, Boca Raton. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420026221</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Day, M. and Shaw, K. (2001) Biological, Chemical and Physical Processes of Composting. Compost Utilization in Horticultural Cropping Systems. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, 17-50.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Epstein, E. (2017) The Science of Composting. CRC Press, Boca Raton.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hurisso, T.T., Davis, J.G., Brummer, J.E., et al. (2013) Rapid Changes in Microbial Biomass and Aggregate Size Distribution in Response to Changes in Organic Matter Management in Grass Pasture. Geoderma, 193-194, 68-75.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2012.10.016</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fawcett, R. and Caruana, S. (2001) Better Soil Better Yields. Conservation Technology Information Center, Lafayette, IN.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hudson</surname><given-names> B.D. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1994</year>)<article-title>Soil Organic Matter and Available Water Capacity</article-title><source> Journal of Soil and Water Conservation</source><volume> 49</volume>,<fpage> 189</fpage>-<lpage>194</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>McDonald</surname><given-names> D. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2011</year>)<article-title>How to Make Organics Recycling “Business as Usual”</article-title><source> BioCycle; Emmauus</source><volume> 52</volume>,<fpage> 27</fpage>-<lpage>31</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">NRCS and USDA (2013) The Value of Soil Health.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Logsdon, S. and Malone, R. (2015) Surface Compost Effect on Hydrology: In-Situ and Soil Cores. Compost Science &amp; Utilization, 23, 30-36. 
https://doi.org/10.1080/1065657X.2014.949909</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Olson, N.C., Gulliver, J.S., Nieber, J.L. and Kayhanian, M. (2013) Remediation to Improve Infiltration into Compact Soils. Journal of Environmental Management, 117, 85-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.10.057</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">CalRecycle (2015) Compost and Mulch Water Conservation &amp; GHG Literature Review.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Curtis, M.J. and Claassen, V.P. (2009) Regenerating Topsoil Functionality in Four Drastically Disturbed Soil Types by Compost Incorporation. Restoration Ecology, 17, 24-32. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2007.00329.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">NSW (2007) Conserving Water Using Compost. Department of Environment and Climate Change, University of New South Wales, Sydney.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Gupta, S.C. and Larson, W.E. (1979) Estimating Soil Water Retention Characteristics from Particle Size Distribution, Organic Matter Percent, and Bulk Density. Water Resources Research, 15, 1633-1635.  
https://doi.org/10.1029/WR015i006p01633</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Stromberger, M. (2004) Soil Microbiology, Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Colorado State University, Compost Effects on Soil Quality, at Biocycle Conference, Denver, Colorado. p. 20.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hoitink, H.A.J. and Fahy, P.C. (1986) Basis for the Control of Soilborne Plant Pathogens with Composts. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 24, 93-114. 
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.py.24.090186.000521</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">US Composting Council (2003) Seal of Testing Assurance.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wright, J. (2019) Conservation of Irrigation Water through the Use of Compost as a Soil Amendment. Civil and Environmental Department, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology, Rapid City.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kirkham, M.B. (2014) Principles of Soil and Plant Water Relations. Academic Press, Cambridge.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zotarelli, L., Dukes, M. and Morgan, K. (2010) Interpretation of Soil Moisture Content to Determine Soil Field Capacity and Avoid Over-Irrigating Sandy Soils Using Soil Moisture Sensors. University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Gainesville, FL.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Thein, M.J. (1979) Field Guide to Soil Texture Classification. Bookmarks Inc., Toronto.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">EPA (1995) 40 CFR Part 503—Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge. Code of Federal Regulations.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dalal, R. (1998) Soil Microbial Biomass—What Do the Numbers Really Mean? Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 38, 649-665. 
https://doi.org/10.1071/EA97142</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.118011-ref40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Reitsma, K. (2012) Increasing Soil Organic Matter Levels in South Dakota. SDSU Extension Service, Brookings, SD.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>