4.5 Article

Factors Affecting Successful Establishment of Aerially Seeded Winter Rye

期刊

AGRONOMY JOURNAL
卷 105, 期 6, 页码 1868-1877

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.2134/agronj2013.0133

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources
  2. Hueg-Harrison Fellowship
  3. ARS [ARS-0422678, 813260] Funding Source: Federal RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Establishing cover crops in a corn (Zea mays L.)-soybean (Glycine max L.) rotation in northern climates can be difficult due to the short time between harvest and freezing temperatures. Aerial seeding into standing crops is one way to increase the time for germination and growth. Field studies were conducted to characterize the physical and chemical properties that affect winter rye (Secale cereale L.) establishment in corn and soybean, while a germination experiment was designed to determine optimal temperature and surface soil moisture content needed for successful germination. In the field study, 31 field-scale sites (22 corn and nine soybean) were aerially seeded in southeastern Minnesota during late August to early September 2009, 2010, and 2011. Aboveground biomass was collected before the ground froze, and multiple regression analysis was used to relate biomass to multiple soil and weather conditions. Total N uptake also was determined. Overall, precipitation the week after seeding was the most important factor in determining rye establishment, although our model accounted for only 43% of the variation in biomass. The germination study characterized winter rye germination on the surface of three different soils equilibrated to -50, -200, and -500 kPa water potential placed in three low-temperature incubators at 10, 18, and 25 degrees C. Total germination was decreased by decreasing water potential in the sandy loam but not the clay or silt loam, suggesting that moisture content may be more important than water potential at the soil surface. Generally, germination was drastically reduced below a moisture content of 0.083 g g(-1).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据