No abstract

In Scandinavia high losses of soil and particulate‐bound phosphorus (PP) have been shown to occur from tine‐cultivated and mouldboard‐ploughed soils in clay soil areas, especially in relatively warm, wet winters. The omission in the autumn of primary tillage (not ploughing) and the maintenance of a continuous crop cover are generally used to control soil erosion. In Norway, ploughing and shallow cultivation of sloping fields in spring instead of ploughing in autumn have been shown to reduce particle transport by up to 89% on highly erodible soils. Particle erosion from clay soils can be reduced by 79% by direct drilling in spring compared with autumn ploughing. Field experiments in Scandinavia with ploughless tillage of clay loams and clay soils compared to conventional autumn ploughing usually show reductions in total P losses of 10–80% by both surface and subsurface runoff (lateral movements to drains). However, the effects of not ploughing during the autumn on losses of dissolved reactive P (DRP) are frequently negative, since the DRP losses without ploughing compared to conventional ploughing have increased up to fourfold in field experiments. In addition, a comprehensive Norwegian field experiment at a site with high erosion risk has shown that the proportion of DRP compared to total P was twice as high in runoff water after direct drilling compared to ploughing. Therefore, erosion control measures should be further evaluated for fields with an erosion risk since reduction in PP losses may be low and DRP losses still high. Ploughless tillage systems have potential side‐effects, including an increased need for pesticides to control weeds [e.g. Elytrigia repens (L.) Desv. ex Nevski] and plant diseases (e.g. Fusarium spp.) harboured by crop residues on the soil surface. Overall, soil tillage systems should be appraised for their positive and negative environmental effects before they are widely used for all types of soil, management practice, climate and landscape.

No abstract

No abstract

Soils are vital for supporting food security and other ecosystem services. Climate change can affect soil functions both directly and indirectly. Direct effects include temperature, precipitation, and moisture regime changes. Indirect effects include those that are induced by adaptations such as irrigation, crop rotation changes, and tillage practices. Although extensive knowledge is available on the direct effects, an understanding of the indirect effects of agricultural adaptation options is less complete. A review of 20 agricultural adaptation case‐studies across Europe was conducted to assess implications to soil threats and soil functions and the link to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The major findings are as follows: (a) adaptation options reflect local conditions; (b) reduced soil erosion threats and increased soil organic carbon are expected, although compaction may increase in some areas; (c) most adaptation options are anticipated to improve the soil functions of food and biomass production, soil organic carbon storage, and storing, filtering, transforming, and recycling capacities, whereas possible implications for soil biodiversity are largely unknown; and (d) the linkage between soil functions and the SDGs implies improvements to SDG 2 (achieving food security and promoting sustainable agriculture) and SDG 13 (taking action on climate change), whereas the relationship to SDG 15 (using terrestrial ecosystems sustainably) is largely unknown. The conclusion is drawn that agricultural adaptation options, even when focused on increasing yields, have the potential to outweigh the negative direct effects of climate change on soil degradation in many European regions.