Living mulch is a cover crop which is intercropped with a cash crop to protect against soil erosion and structural deterioration without taking land out of production. To avoid interference which reduces cash crop yield, the mulch requires management techniques which minimize resource utilization during the critical period of crop development without killing the mulch outright. The experiments reported here examine non-chemical management innovations in a sweet corn-white clover intercrop system which allow for clover regrowth and also contribute to the N requirement of the corn. In 1986 clover was suppressed by mowing or partial rototilling. Yields of corn in plots where clover was rototilled were comparable to yields of clean cultivated corn and superior to yields from plots where clover was mowed or unsuppressed. In 1987 rototilling was compared at 3 timings after corn emergence. Highest corn yields were obtained by rototilling the well-established clover at 2 rather than 4 or 6 weeks after emergence. Yields from rototilled plots in 1987 exceeded those from clean cultivated plots or plots where clover was unsuppressed. After rototilling, the clover reestablished via stoloniferous growth emanating from a narrow strip of roots which passed between the tiller tines. In both years corn leaf N concentrations were highest in the rototilled plots. In 1987 clean cultivated corn appeared N deficient and had a greater incidence of corn smut than corn from the rototilled clover plots. Multiple corn row arrangements which facilitate access to the mulch were compared at a constant plant population to conventional single rows on 76 cm centers. There were no differences in yield between single and double rows (152 cm centers) in either year, while the triple-row arrangement (228 cm centers) reduced yield in 1987 due to the low productivity of the plants in the middle row of the 3 rows.
Organic farming and the Low Input Sustainable Agriculture (LISA) program are both part of an alternative agricultural movement that promotes the use of biological interactions and cultural practices over agricultural chemicals. The goal of this movement is productive, profitable agriculture that protects the natural resources that are essential to long-term sustainability. While there are many production practices that are accepted as both organic and LISA, these terms are not synonymous. The use of synthetic pesticides and fertilizers is largely prohibited on organic farms but allowed to some extent by LISA. In addition, certification programs have been developed for organic farms but not for LISA practitioners. Definitions LISA. The U.S. Dept. of Agriculture initiated the LISA research and education grants program in 1988 as part of the 1985 Food Security Act. The term LISA is frequently used to describe the recently changed way in which mainstream farmers and researchers approach agricultural problem-solving. This change is based largely on an increasing awareness that farm practices must be judged not only by their effect on short-term yield and profit but also by their impact on water quality, soil productivity, and human health. These concerns have come to the forefront in the so-called conventional agricultural community largely since LISA's inception and partially as a result of the credibility that LISA has lent to alternative agricultural practices intended to address such concerns. LISA is meant to "lessen the farmer's dependence on purchased inputs, especially synthetic chemical pesticides and fertilizers...(by) greater use of crop rotations, crop and livestock diversification, soil and water conservation practices, greater use of animal and green manures, biological pest controls, and mechanical cultivation where appropriate" (U.S. Dept. of Agr. 1991). It is generally acknowledged that technologies that reduce the need for purchased inputs depend on greater inputs of information and management; thus, the term lowinput is somewhat misleading. The recent report on alternative agriculture by the National Research Council, which describes farms that use many LISA practices, concludes that alternative farming is not based on a well-defined set of management techniques but on a range of technologies and management options (National Res. Council, 1989). Organic. Many of the alternative practices promoted by LISA are also those that are frequently found on organic farms. However, the use of synthetic nutrients and pesticides is largely avoided by organic producers, while LISA allows the wise and limited use of such inputs. Therefore, organic practices comprise a subset of those promoted by LISA. Organic farming was defined by the landmark U.S. Dept. of Agriculture report of 1980 as "...production systems which avoid or largely exclude the use of synthetically compounded fertilizers, pesticides, growth regulators and...rely upon crop rotations, crop residues, animal manures, green manures, off-farm organic wa...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.