4.1 Article

Dryland soil chemical properties and crop yields affected by long-term tillage and cropping sequence

Journal

SPRINGERPLUS
Volume 4, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER INT PUBL AG
DOI: 10.1186/s40064-015-1122-4

Keywords

Chemical properties; Crop yields; Nutrients; Tillage; Crop rotation

Funding

  1. ARS [813537, ARS-0425353] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Information on the effect of long-term management on soil nutrients and chemical properties is scanty. We examined the 30-year effect of tillage frequency and cropping sequence combination on dryland soil Olsen-P, K, Ca, Mg, Na, SO4-S, and Zn concentrations, pH, electrical conductivity (EC), and cation exchange capacity (CEC) at the 0-120 cm depth and annualized crop yield in the northern Great Plains, USA. Treatments were no-till continuous spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) (NTCW), spring till continuous spring wheat (STCW), fall and spring till continuous spring wheat (FSTCW), fall and spring till spring wheat-barley (Hordeum vulgare L., 1984-1999) followed by spring wheat-pea (Pisum sativum L., 2000-2013) (FSTW-B/P), and spring till spring wheat-fallow (STW-F, traditional system). At 0-7.5 cm, P, K, Zn, Na, and CEC were 23-60% were greater, but pH, buffer pH, and Ca were 6-31% lower in NTCW, STCW, and FSTW-B/P than STW-F. At 7.5-15 cm, K was 23-52% greater, but pH, buffer pH, and Mg were 3-21% lower in NTCW, STCW, FSTCW, FSTW-B/P than STW-F. At 60-120 cm, soil chemical properties varied with treatments. Annualized crop yield was 23-30% lower in STW-F than the other treatments. Continuous N fertilization probably reduced soil pH, Ca, and Mg, but greater crop residue returned to the soil increased P, K, Na, Zn, and CEC in NTCW and STCW compared to STW-F. Reduced tillage with continuous cropping may be adopted for maintaining long-term soil fertility and crop yields compared with the traditional system.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available