Studies on technological quality of sugar beets and soil parameters in relation to method of soil fertilization

International Journal of Environmental & Agriculture Research (IJOEAR) ISSN:[2454-1850] [Vol-2, Issue-2, February- 2016]
Page | 42
Studies on technological quality of sugar beets and soil
parameters in relation to method of soil fertilization
Andrzej Baryga1
, Bożenna Połeć2
Prof. Wacław Dąbrowski Institute of Agricultural and Food Biotechnology Sugar Department, Leszno, Poland
Abstract— The aim of the studies was to determine suitability of effluent from methane digestion of organic wastes
generated during processing of sugar beets for soil application at sugar beet plantations. In the paper parameters of
technological value of sugar beet roots harvested from plots with standard values (i.e. optimal values for processing) which
were defined by the Institute are discussed. It was shown that effluent from digestion of sugar beet pulp can be utilized as soil
amendment on sugar beet plantations without any restrictions bearing in mind content of heavy metals and harmful
microorganisms. Nutrients contained in studied effluent from gasifier are available for sugar beet plants at the same level as
nutrients from mineral fertilizers. Determination of heavy metals in soil samples taken before and after effluent application
did not reveal accumulation of harmful elements in the soil in the result of waste utilization.
Keywords— digestion effluent, fertilization, soil, sugar beet, sugar beet technological value.
I. INTRODUCTION
Root of sugar beet for processing purposes should show good health status, natural colour and shape, cannot be wilted,
frozen or lignified. Technological value of sugar beet is described in the literature as a complex of biological, physical and
chemical properties of root which determines positive effects of processing on effectiveness of white sugar gain. The
essential roots‟ traits affecting quality of sugar beets are as follows: Biological- shape of root determining content of mineral
impurities; resistance to diseases; resistance to bolters production; suitability for storage; chemical -content of sucrose;
content of marc; content of α
– amino acid nitrogen and amide nitrogen; content of sodium and potassium; content of invert sugar; content of
conductometric ash, content of dry matter, Physical - resistance to outer effects; resistance to outer effects; resilience module;
coefficient of diffusion; mean root weight; in tissue compliance to slicing (Malec et al. 2007).
At the high extend quality of feedstock determines the proper course of processing as well as losses of sucrose and efficiency
of white sugar gain. In modern sugar factories processing of sugar beet roots into white sugar does not create any technical
problems if factory receives roots directly form plantations or after relatively short time storage.
Anyway during campaign of sugar beet processing weather creates lot of problems which result in serious technological
problems and final effects are financial losses. The basic factor which often has deterioration effect on status of stored sugar
beet roots is temperature. Too low temperatures cause freezing of roots whereas too high temperature results in starting of
biochemical processes and development of moulds what degrades quality of roots (Gajewnik 2015).
It is widely known that sugar beets have high requirements concerning soil quality. The medium structured soils are optimal
(optimal are medium loams and sandy clay) however high yields can be gained also on heavy clay.
The main parameters of soil for growing sugar beets are as follows: deep plough layer; high content of humic substances; soil
reaction close to pH 7.0; good texture; balanced water properties; resistance to sliming and clodding.
The main factor determining sugar beet yield as well as its technological quality is fertilization. Deficits of nutrients in the
soil result in yield reduction and their excess is also unfavourable because can considerably affect quality of roots. Sugar beet
is one of crops most susceptible to nutrients imbalance in the soil because natural soil fertility cannot cover high crop
demands and application of synthetic fertilizers and organic amendments is necessary (Malec et al. 2007).
During the processing of sugar beet roots into white sugar a high amount of beet pulp is generated which has been used as a
feed for ruminants. High water content of the pulp which directly increases transportation and storage cost was a prerequisite
to searching of new option of effective application of this by-product. The second prerequisite is connected with sharp
decrease of cattle number and specialisation in agricultural sector, farm which grows sugar beets often does not run animal
production and therefore does not need sugar pulp.

Page | 43
According to EU regulations in Poland share of energy from renewable sources should reach 14% in 2020 (Witek 2008). At
the moment biomass is considered as a main source of renewable energy in Poland and is produced on arable lands from
short-rotation coppice willow plantations where Salix viminalis and some other willow hybrids are grown (Berruto et al.
2013, Szczukowski et al. 2003).
Option of nutrients recycling by application of organic amendment i.e., effluent from methane digestion of beet pulp can be
treated as environmentally friendly closing of nutrients turnover cycle what is desirable for sustainability of agricultural
system (Bachmann et al. 2014, Chen 2012).
At the moment in Poland the problem of management of effluent from gasifiers processing different organic feedstocks is
difficult because certificate for soil application is necessary if company does not receive this certificate the only alternative is
incineration what because of high cost (700 PLN ~ 170 € Mg-1
) makes investment in gasifier unprofitable.
It is known that soil application of effluent from methane digestion at plantation of Salix viminalis is currently under studies
and first obtained results are promising (Urban 2011, Zając 2011).
So far no publication about application of sugar beet effluent at plantations of sugar beets was found. Therefore our studies
were undertaken to determine suitability of application of effluent from methane digestion of beet pulp and other organic
wastes as an organic amendment on sugar beet plantation.
II. MATERIALS AND METHODS
Studied materials were: soil samples, effluent after methane digestion of beet pulp and sugar beet roots harvested from
experimental plots (sugar beet cv. Fighter). Studies were conducted in growing season of 2013 at sugar beet plantation
owned by Institute of Agricultural and Food Biotechnology in Leszno, Poland. Just before beets planting soil samples from
topsoil layer were taken to determine soil basic chemical and microbiological properties. Then fertilization treatments were
established in triplicate and the rate of nitrogen 120 kg N ha-1
was applied as synthetic fertilizer or appropriate rate of effluent
from methane digestion of beet pulp. After sugar beets harvesting estimation of technological properties for processing was
performed using 5 randomly selected roots and soil samples were then taken. The following analytical methods of soil
samples were applied: pH – potentiometric; total nitrogen – by Kjeldahl distillation; nitrate nitrogen – spectrophotometric;
nitrites – diazo process; ammonia and amide nitrogen – titration with water steam; presence of parasites Ascaris sp.,
Trichuris sp., Toxocara sp. according to Polish National standards; magnesium and calcium – titration; potassium, cadmium,
nickel, chromium, copper, sodium and zinc – AAS; mercury – AAS in amalgamate. The following method of sugar beet
analyses were applied: total nitrogen – by Kjeldahl distillation; α – amino acid nitrogen – spectrophotometric; total
phopshorus – valandium molybdenic method; sucrose – polarymetric; reductive compounds – titration; conductometric ash –
potentiometric method.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Agricultural utilization of organic wastes (including effluent from methane digestion) is possible only if requirements set by
Regulation given by the Minister of Environment on 13th
July 2010 are fulfilled. Mentioned requirements concern soil
properties as well as wastes.
Requirements concern soil where wastes are intended to be applied and the quality of wastes.
In mentioned Regulation permissible levels of heavy metals in topsoil are specified if wastes are applied to the soil.
In Table 1 these requirements are presented together with analytical results of soil samples from experimental field.
As it can be noticed from data presented in Table 1 concentration of all studied heavy metals in soil from experimental field
was lower than permissible threshold irrespectively of agronomical category of the soil: light, medium of heavy textured.

Page | 44
TABLE 1
COMPARISON OF PERMISSIBLE LEVELS OF HEAVY METALS IN TOPSOIL (0-25 CM DEPTH) FOR AGRICULTURAL
UTILIZATION OF WASTES WITH RESULTS OF DETERMINATION OF SOIL SAMPLED AT EXPERIMENTAL FIELD (mg kg-1
)
Metal
Results of determination of soil from
experimental field
Permissible level of given metal in three types soil for
utilization of organic wastes
light medium
textured
heavy
Cadmium (Cd) < 0.50 ≤ 1 ≤ 2 ≤ 3
Lead (Pb) 24 ≤ 40 ≤ 60 ≤ 80
Nickiel (Ni) 8.0 ≤ 20 ≤ 35 ≤ 50
Chromium (Cr) 12.0 ≤ 50 ≤ 75 ≤ 100
Mercury (Hg) < 0.050 ≤ 0.8 ≤ 1.2 ≤ 1.5
Copper (Cu) 16.0 ≤ 25 ≤ 50 ≤ 75
Zinc (Zn) 46.0 ≤ 80 ≤ 120 ≤ 180
In Table 2 chemical characteristics of digestion effluent is given. The waste was then applied to the soil at experimental field.
It was found that waste can be applied to the soil without any restrictions as far as food or feed crops are concerned.
TABLE 2
THE QUALITY OF DIGESTION EFFLUENT APPLIED AT EXPERIMENTAL FIELD ON THE BACKGROUND OF PERMISSIBLE
LEVELS
Parameter Unit Results Permissible level
Soil reaction pH-H2O 7.8 –*
Dry matter (DM) % fresh matter 2.5 –
Organic substances % DM 55.8 –
Cadmium (Cd) mg kg-1
DM 2.73 ≤ 20
Lead (Pb) mg kg-1
DM 17.1 ≤ 750
Nickiel (Ni) mg kg-1
DM 5.51 ≤ 300
Chromium (Cr) mg kg-1
DM 29.6 ≤ 500
Mercury (Hg) mg kg-1
DM 0.543 ≤16
Copper (Cu) mg kg-1
DM 108 ≤ 1000
Zinc (Zn) mg kg-1
DM 846 ≤ 2500
Calcium (Ca) mg kg-1
DM 129 –
Magnesium (Mg) mg kg-1
DM 4.02 –
Total nitrogen Kjeldahls‟ N g kg-1
DM 38.4 –
Total phosphorus (P) g kg-1
DM 12.6 –
Potasium (K) g kg-1
DM 2.25 –
Salmonella in 100 g not found 0
Number of living eggs of: Atrichuris sp.,
Trichuris sp., Tococara sp.
kg-1
DM not found 0
* not specified in the Regulations of Minister of Environment

Page | 45
In Table 3 mean values of selected quality indices of sugar beet roots are presented on the background of optimal values for
sugar beet roots processing which were elaborated by the Institute.
TABLE 3
COMPARISON OF QUALITY INDICES OF SUGAR BEETS HARVESTED FROM EXPERIMENTAL FIELD WITH THE
OPTIMAL VALUES OF GIVEN INDEX FOR PROCESSING IN SUGAR FACTORY
No Item
Optimal value
for processing
Results of determination: LSD
(t-Student
P = 0.05)mineral fertilizers
120 kg N ha-1
digestion effluent
120 kg N ha-1
1.
Czsg – predicted purity of thick juice
99.36 - 0.1427 ( Na+ K +α – N)
> 92 97.3 97.9 0.5
2.
„Purity” index
Ck % × 100/dry matter %
> 70 81 77 NS
3.
Ckm - predicted sugar content in molasses
according to Wieninger‟s 0.349 (Na + K)
< 2 1.3 1.0 NS
4.
WAI – alkalinity index with invert sugar
Na+K/α – N +I
>1,8 3.1 2.2 NS
5.
Ash index
Ck %/ash %
> 40 60 64 NS
6.
Index of α – amino acid nitrogen
Ck %/ α – N %
> 800 2341 3050 NS
7.
Amide nitrogen index
Ck %/ amide N %
> 750 1545 1426 290.2
8.
Index of reductive substances
Ck % / reductive substances %
> 100 261 177 65.5
9.
Nonsugar index
Ck %/ soluble nonsugar%
> 10 4 4 NS
10.
Index of potassium alkalinity
K %/ α – N %
> 8 15 17 NS
11.
Index of ash alkalinity
ash %/ α – N %
> 15 38 48 NS
*Ck %- content of sucrose; NS–not significant;
In Table 3 comparison of technological value indices of sugar beets harvested from plot of two experimental treatments is
given.
For sugar factories processing of sugar beets all listed quality indices are very important because they determine
technological value of sugar beet roots. It is connected that processing of sugar beets consists of several technological phases
and each requires specific conditions determined by: time, temperature and pH of solutions and juices.
Eleven indices i.e., their optimal values and obtained for harvested sugar beet roots are listed in Table 3.

Page | 46
FIG. 1 MODIFICATIONS OF PREDICTED PURITY OF THICK JUICE IN RELATIONS TO FERTILIZATION
TREATMENTS
Predicted purity of thick juice obtained for sugar beet roots in the experiment was higher than optimal i.e., > 92% and for
treatment with mineral fertilizer and digestion effluent amounted to 97.3 and 97.9%, respectively. It was found that this
difference was statistically proven at P = 0.05.
FIG. 2 MODIFICATIONS OF PREDICTED PURITY IN RELATIONS TO FERTILIZATION TREATMENTS
“Purity” index of sugar beet roots (i.e., percentage of sucrose in dry matter) was higher than optimal (70%) and it amounted
to 81 and 77% for treatment with mineral fertilizer and digestion effluent, respectively but this significance of differences
was not found.
FIG. 3 MODIFICATIONS OF PREDICTED SUCROSE LOSSES IN MOLASSES IN RELATIONS TO FERTILIZATION
TREATMENTS

Page | 47
Predicted amount of sucrose in molasses according to Wieninger‟s formula when taking into account only sodium and
potassium is regarded as optimal when is lower than 2%. For roots harvested from treatment with mineral fertilizer and
digestion effluent amounted to 1.3 and 1.0%, respectively. Losses of sucrose in molasses are considered as the main source
of sugar losses during processing so its high importance of this parameter for sugar factory. From obtained results it is
evident that both treatments did not negatively affected quality of sugar beet roots but difference was not significant at P =
0.05.
FIG. 4 MODIFICATIONS OF ALKALINITY INDEX WITH INVERT SUGAR IN RELATIONS TO FERTILIZATION
TREATMENTS
Values of alkalinity index with invert sugar (WAI) amounted to 3.1 and 2.2 for roots harvested from plots with mineral
fertilization and application of digestion effluent, respectively. Mentioned values were higher than recommended for
processing (1.8). A higher value means that reaction of juices (from diffusion juice to thin clarified juice) is alkaline what
ensures lower losses in whole technological process. From obtained results it can be concluded that no additional costs are
needed for processing sugar beet roots harvested from fields amended with digestion effluent. According to ANOVA results
differences between two studied treatments were not significant.
FIG. 5 MODIFICATIONS OF PREDICTED ASH INDEX IN RELATIONS TO FERTILIZATION TREATMENTS
Values of ash indices have to be considered as optimal for sugar beet roots processing when they are higher than 40. For both
studied treatments value of this index amounted to ca. 60 because of low ash concentration in sugar beet roots. Differences of
ash index values between studied treatments were not significant at P = 0.05.

Page | 48
FIG. 6 MODIFICATIONS OF PREDICTED INDEX OF Α – AMINO ACID NITROGEN IN RELATIONS TO
FERTILIZATION TREATMENTS
Value of α – amino acid nitrogen was substantially higher than it was assumed. It can negatively affect processing of sugar
beet roots because of juice colour modifications and reduction of alkalinity. To overcome it higher dose of lime has to be
applied what increase processing cost. It was found for roots of both treatments and method of fertilization has not significant
effect on this parameter.
FIG. 7 MODIFICATIONS OF PREDICTED INDEX OF AMIDE NITROGEN IN RELATIONS TO FERTILIZATION
TREATMENTS
Amide compounds are undesirable in sugar production because their chemical and thermal degradation takes a long time and
the final product is gaseous nitrogen. Reduction of amide compounds in feedstock is profitable for sugar factories.
Partly degraded amide compounds are responsible for: reduction of juices pH; pollution of condensates in evaporators which
are directed to steam boilers which give technological steam to turbines.
Index of amide nitrogen should be higher than 250. Samples of sugar beet roots harvested from experimental plots
irrespectively of the method of fertilization showed optimal value of this index. Roots harvested from plot treated with
mineral fertilizer showed significantly higher value of amide nitrogen index comparing to roots fertilized with digestion
effluent.

Page | 49
FIG. 8 MODIFICATIONS OF PREDICTED INDEX OF REDUCTIVE SUBSTANCES –INVERT SUGAR IN RELATIONS TO
FERTILIZATION TREATMENTS
Reductive substances unfavourably affect processing of sugar beet roots because of: generation of coloured products in
reaction with amino acids; necessity of application of high rates of lime during clarification of juices; degradation of invert
sugars to different by-products and among them lactate acid and reduction of juice pH because organic acids are generated.
Limited amount of invert sugars in roots indicates stabilization of this simple sugar in cell vacuole. From obtained results can
be concluded that this index was optimal for sugar beet roots processing and in case of roots harvested from plots fertilized
with mineral nitrogen this index value was significantly higher than for roots from plots amended with digestion effluent.
FIG. 9 MODIFICATIONS OF PREDICTED INDEX OF NONSUGARS IN RELATIONS TO FERTILIZATION
TREATMENTS

Page | 50
FIG. 10 MODIFICATIONS OF PREDICTED INDEX OF POTASSIUM ALKALINITY IN RELATIONS TO FERTILIZATION
TREATMENTS
Values of nonsugar index were lower than low threshold considered as optimal what indicated that quality of roots was lower
than optimal irrespectively of the fertilization treatment.
Index of potassium alkalinity should be higher than 8 and index of ash alkalinity higher than 15. Free cations and easily
soluble potassium and sodium salts present in juice represent so called „natural juice alkalinity‟. Cations and salts have
positive role because they maintain alkaline i.e., desirable pH of juice but they are effective only at appropriate concentration.
If this concentration is too low than sodium carbonate (Na2CO3) has to be applied. Optimal values have to be treated as
thresholds and if actual values are lower at the stage of saturation water solution of soda has to be added to achieve molasses
pH at 7.2 – 8.2. Under conditions of full scale production it result in higher losses of sugar in molasses because soda
generates more molasses than magnesium or calcium compounds.
FIG. 11 MODIFICATIONS OF PREDICTED INDEX OF ASH ALKALINITY IN RELATIONS TO FERTILIZATION
TREATMENTS
From obtained results it can be concluded that both indices of alkalinity showed values optimal for processing of sugar beet
roots irrespectively of fertilization treatment under studies.
Generally it was found that sugar beet roots harvested from experimental plots showed satisfactory level of studied quality
indices for processing for both studied fertilization treatments.

Page | 51
After sugar beet harvesting soil analyses were repeated.
Data from Table 4 show modifications of soil chemical parameters in the growing period of sugar beet on experimental field
with two fertilization treatments.
TABLE 4
COMPARISON OF CHEMICAL PARAMETERS OF THE SOIL BEFORE AND AFTER GROWTH OF SUGAR BEET
UNDER CONDITIONS OF TWO FERTILIZATION TREATMENTS
Parameter Unit
Before sugar
beet planting
After sugar beet harvesting
mineral fertilizers
120 kg N ha-1
digestion effluent
120 kg N ha-1
Soil reaction pH-H2O 7.6 8.3 8.3
Dry matter (DM) % fresh matter 84.2 81.5 83.3
Organic substances % DM 2.7 2.8 2.6
Cadmium (Cd) mg kg-1
DM < 0.50 < 0.50 < 0.50
Lead (Pb) mg kg-1
DM 24.0 37.0 33.0
Nickiel (Ni) mg kg-1
DM 8.0 7.5 8.4
Chromium (Cr) mg kg-1
DM 12.0 20.0 16.0
Mercury (Hg) mg kg-1
DM < 0.050 < 0.050 < 0.050
Copper (Cu) mg kg-1
DM 16.0 22.0 21.0
Zinc (Zn) mg kg-1
DM 46.0 55.0 46.0
Calcium (Ca) mg Ca kg-1
DM 7270 8800 8030
Available magnesium mg Mg kg-1
DM 54 55 54
Total nitrogen Kjeldahls‟ mg N kg-1
DM 1340 1020 920
Available phospurus mg P kg-1
DM 460 600 540
Available potassium mg K kg-1
DM 44 35 32
As it can be concluded from results presented in Table 4 that soil analysed after sugar beets harvesting contained high
concentration of nutrients –amendment with digestion effluent ensured high fertility of experimental soil: nitrogen – 920
(before) and 1340 mg N kg-1
DM (after harvesting); phosphorus – 540 (before) and 460 mg P kg-1
DM (after harvesting);
potassium – 32 (before) and 44 mg K kg-1
DM (after harvesting).
Summing up obtained results it can be stated that macronutrients present in digestion effluent were available for plants. No
significant differences between availability of macronutrients from mineral fertilizers and digestion effluent were found. Soil
after sugar beet growing period showed higher concentration of calcium and phosphorus irrespectively of fertilization
treatments applied. Initial content of calcium in the soil was 7270 mg Ca kg-1
DM and after sugar beets harvesting 8030 and
8800 for treatment with digestion effluent and mineral fertilizer, respectively; initial content of phosphorus in the soil was
460 mg P kg-1
DM and after sugar beets harvesting 540 and 600 for treatment with digestion effluent and mineral fertilizer,
respectively.
Heavy metals analysis in the soil showed that accumulation in the soil of cadmium, nickel and mercury was not noted.
However, in case of lead, chromium, copper and zinc increase of their content in the soil was found but agricultural
suitability of soil was not changed.
IV. CONCLUSION
Effluent after digestion of sugar beet pulp can be applied to the soil bearing in mind content of heavy metals and microbes.

Page | 52
It cannot be stated which method of fertilization (mineral fertilizer or digestion effluent) with rate of 120 kg N ha-1 was
better in terms of technological quality of feedstock for sugar factory.
Evaluation of technological quality of sugar beet roots harvested from experimental field performed on the base of quality
criteria has shown that sugar beet roots from both treatments fulfilled those criteria.
In the soil analysed after sugar beet harvesting high concentration of essential nutrients was found what indicated that soil
was not depleted and maintained high fertility.
Nutrients from digestion effluent were available for sugar beet plants in the same level as from mineral fertilizers. Soil after
growing sugar beets was enriched of calcium and phosphorus irrespectively of fertilization treatment.
Determination of heavy metals in experimental soil before sugar beet planting and after harvesting did not show any
accumulation of cadmium, nickel and mercury and in case of lead, chromium, copper and zinc their elevated level cannot
cause any threats for crops and the environment..
REFERENCES
[1] S. Bachmann, M. Gropp, and B. Eichler-Löbermann, “Phosphorus availability and soil microbial activity in a 3 year field experiment
amended with digested dairy slurry,” Biomass and Bioenergy, 2014, vol. 70, pp. 429–439.
[2] R. Berruto, P. Busato, D. D. Bochtis, and C. G. Sorensen, “Comparison of distribution systems for biogas plant residual,” Biomass
Bioenergy, 2013, vol. 52, pp. 139–150.
[3] R. Chen, E. Blagodatskaya, M. Senbayram, S. Blagodatsky, O. Myachina, K. Dittert, and Y. Kuzyakov, “Decomposition of biogas
residues in soil and their effects on microbial growth kinetics and enzyme activities,” Biomass and Bioenergy, 2012, vol. 45, pp. 221–
229.
[4] A. Curkowski., P. Mroczkowski, A. Oniszk-Popławska, and G. Wiśniewski, “Biogaz rolniczy – produkcja i wykorzystanie”.
[Agricultural Biogas - production and use - in Polish] Mazowiecka Agencja Energetyczna Sp. z .o.o., Warszawa, 2009, pp. 15-17.
[5] W. Czekała, K. Pilarski, J. Dach, D. Janczak, and M. Szymańska, “Analiza możliwości zagospodarowania profermentu z biogazowni”
[Analysis of the possibilities of utilization of fermentation residues from biogas plants - in Polish] Technika Rolnicza Ogrodnicza
Leśna SGGW, Warszawa, 2012, vol. 4, pp. 13-15.
[6] Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the Landfill of Waste. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:01999L0031-20111213&qid=1436377665959&from=PL (access on 7 July 2015).
[7] B. Gajewnik, 2015 “Wpływ podstawowych parametrów jakościowych buraków cukrowych na ich wartość technologiczną” [The
impact of basic quality parameters of sugar beet on their technological value in Polish - sent for publication]
[8] M. Greger, T. Malm, and L. Kautsky, “Heavy metal transfer from composted macroalgae to crops,” Eur. J. Agron., 2007, vol. 26, no.
3, pp. 257–265.
[9] A. Jędrczak, “Biologiczne przetwarzanie odpadów” [Biological waste processing - in Polish] Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, 2008,
Warszawa.
[10] A. Kowalczyk-Juśko, “Źródło przychodu czy kłopot?” [Source of income or just a problem? – in Polish] Agroenergetyka, 2010, vol.
3, pp. 36-40.
[11] K. Kuligowski, “Termiczna gazyfikacja pelet z pofermentu z biogazowni rolniczej i wykorzystanie popiołu do nawożenia. Materiały z
seminarium Biomasa – Odpady – Energia [Thermal gasification of pellets from fermentation residues from biogas plants and
agriculture the use of ash fertilization. The materials of the Seminar Biomass - Waste – Energy - in Polish] Instytut Maszyn
Przepływowych PAN. Gdańsk 2011
[12] J. Malec and J. Kositorna, “Burak cukrowy uprawa, ochrona, przechowywanie gospodarka surowcowa” [Sugar beet growing,
protection, storage and management in sugar factory – in Polish] IPC, Leszno, 2007.
[13] M. Odlare, M. Pell, and K. Svensson, “Changes in soil chemical and microbiological properties during 4 years of application of
various organic residues,” Waste Manag., 2008, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 1246–1253.
[14] K. Pilarski, J. Dach, D. Janczak, and Z. Zbytek, “Wpływ odległości transportowej na wydajność pracy agregatów i koszty
zagospodarowania pofermentu z biogazowni rolniczej 1 MW” [The influence of transport distance on tank efficiency and
management costs of post-digestate from 1 MW agricultural biogas plant – in Polish] Journal of Research and Applications in
Agricultural Engineering, 2011, vol. 56 , no 1: 109-113.
[15] B. Połeć, K. Gozdek, A. Baryga, and T. Szymański, “Możliwość wytwarzania biogazu w procesie fermentacji metanowej wysłodków
buraczanych. Część I: Fermentacja statyczna wysłodków buraczanych,” [Possibilities of production of biogas in the process of
methane fermentation of beet pulp. Part I: Static fermentation of beet pulp – in Polish with English summary] Gaz Cukr, 2009, no.
11–12, pp. 278–289; 289; 293; 305.
[16] B. Połeć, A. Baryga, T. Szymański, W. Wołyńska, and A. Toboła, “Możliwość wytwarzania biogazu w procesie fermentacji
metanowej wysłodków buraczanych. Cz. II. Fermentacja półciągła wysłodków buraczanych,” [Possibilities of production of biogas in

Page | 53
the process of methane fermentation of beet pulp. Part II: Semicontinuous fermentation of sugar beet pulp in Polish with English
summary] Gaz Cukr, 2010, no. 5, pp. 120–125.
[17] B. Połeć, A. Baryga, T. Szymański, W. Wołyńska, and A. Toboła, “Możliwość wytwarzania biogazu w procesie fermentacji
metanowej wysłodków buraczanych. [Possibilities of production of biogas in the process of methane fermentation of beet pulp. Part
III: Continuous fermentation of sugar beet pulp in Polish with English summary] Cz. III. Fermentacja ciągła wysłodków
buraczanych,” Gaz Cukr, 2011, no. 4, pp. 107–112.
[18] B. Połeć, and A. Baryga, 2011, “Warunki i efekty procesu biogazowania wysłodków buraczanych”. Materiały z Konferencji
Międzynarodowej „Rozwój przemysłu cukrowniczego w aspekcie wdrażania systemów jakości oraz doskonalenia jakości żywności,
pasz i ochrony środowiska” [Terms and outcomes of this process biogassing beet pulp. Proceedings of the International Conference
"The development of the sugar industry in the context of the implementation of quality systems and improving the quality of food,
feed and environmental protection - in Polish], Leszno, 2011
[19] Ordinance of Ministry of Environment of 6 February 2015 on municipal waste sediments. Dz. U. 2015 poz. 257. (In Polish).
[20] Ordinance of Ministry of Environment of 9 December 2014 on catalog of wastes. Dz. U. 2014 nr 112 poz. 1923. (In Polish).
[21] Ordinance of Ministry of Environment of 5 April 2011 on recovery of R10. Dz. U. 2011 nr 86 poz. 476. (In Polish).
[22] Ordinance of Ministry of Economy of 8 January 2013 on criteria and procedures of admitting waste to be stored on landfill sites of
given type. Dz. U. 2013 poz. 38. (In Polish).
[23] S. Szczukowski, and J. Budny, “Wierzba krzewiasta – roślina energetyczna” [Shrub willow - energy plant – in Polish] Wojewódzki
Fundusz Ochrony Środowiska i Gospodarki Wodnej, 2003, vol.37.
[24] Act of 10 July 2007 r. on Fertilizers and Fertilizing. Dz. U. 2007 nr 147 poz. 1033. (In Polish).
[25] Act of 14 December 2012 on Wastes. Dz. U. 2013 nr 0 poz. 21. (In Polish).
[26] P. Urban, 2011, “Wpływ odcieku po zgazowaniu alg na zawartość makroelementów
w łodydze i liściu wierzby energetycznej” [Effect of digestion effluent on macronutrient content of willow dedicated for energy. BSc.
Thesis – in Polish with English summary] Praca inżynierska wykonana pod kierunkiem prof. dr hab. Krystyny A. Skibniewskiej,
2011.
[27] M. Witek, “Małoskalowa energetyka biogazowa – perspektywy rozwoju
w warunkach polskich [The small-scale biogas energy – prospects in Polish conditions – in Polish] Gaz, Woda i Technika Sanitarna,
2008, no 10, pp. 5 – 9.
[28] Ł. Zając, 2011, “Badania nad utylizacją odcieku po produkcji biogazu z alg” [Studies on utilization of digestion effluent from alae
gasification BSc. Thesis – in Polish with English summary]-Praca inżynierska wykonana w Katedrze Podstaw Bezpieczeństwa pod
kierunkiem prof. dr hab. Krystyny A. Skibniewskiej

Studies on technological quality of sugar beets and soil parameters in relation to method of soil fertilization

More Related Content

What's hot (17)

Similar to Studies on technological quality of sugar beets and soil parameters in relation to method of soil fertilization (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Studies on technological quality of sugar beets and soil parameters in relation to method of soil fertilization