4.7 Article

Evidence of improved water uptake from subsoil by spring wheat following lucerne in a temperate humid climate

期刊

FIELD CROPS RESEARCH
卷 126, 期 -, 页码 56-62

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2011.09.019

关键词

Dry spells; Rooting density; Water uptake; Wheat; Crop sequence

类别

资金

  1. German Research Foundation [1320]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dry spells during the summer period affecting water uptake and plant growth in central Europe may occur more frequently in the future due to climate change. Improving the ability of crops to take up water from deeper soil layers is a potential strategy to secure water supply. The objective of this paper is to report on the effect of different preceding fodder crops on root growth and water uptake of spring wheat from the subsoil. Water extraction and root length density during grain filling of spring wheat were observed between anthesis and maturity in six different soil depths (0-15, 15-45, 45-60, 60-75, 75-90 and 90-105 cm) and with four different preceding crops: 1 year of fescue (Fes1Y), 2 years of chicory (Chi2Y), 2 years of lucerne (Luc2Y) and 3 years of chicory (Chi3Y). While there was no difference in total water extraction by wheat in the four crop sequences, water extraction from the deepest layer (90-105 cm) was significantly higher after 2 years of lucerne (Luc2Y). This was consistent with the root length densities measured in the 90-105 layer, which were 82,89 and 112% higher in Luc2Y as compared to Fes1Y, Chi2Y and Chi3Y, respectively. Results suggest that lucerne as preceding crop supports deeper rooting and higher rooting density of following spring wheat enhancing access to water in deeper soil layers in response to prolonged dry spells. Effects facilitating root penetration like improved soil structure and higher nitrogen availability after lucerne are discussed. We conclude that suitable crop rotations with lucerne might be a cost-effective adaptation measure to overcome drought stress. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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