Carryover Response of Tillage Depth, Legume Residue and Nitrogen-rates on Maize Yield and Yield Contributing Traits

Abstract

Maize (Zea mays L.) after wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is successfully grown in tropics and sub-topics where cereals grains contribute in staple food and their by-products as fodder. This study evaluated the carryover response of tillage depth (TD), crop residue (R) and fertilizer nitrogen rates (N) on maize in wheat-maize cropping system during summer 2010 and 2011. On dry matter (DM) basis, 5 tones ha-1 legume residue (LR) of cowpea and cereal residue (CR) from maize vs. no-residue (NR) were incorporated into the soil as main plot treatments. The soil was immediately plowed with moldboard for deep tillage (DT) and with cultivator for shallow tillage (ST) as main plot treatments. Different N-rates (0, 40, 80, 120 and 160 kg ha-1) were applied as subplot treatments. Results showed that DT increased grains yield by 2.27% than ST and ear number by 6%, grain number by 2.79% and thousand grains weight (1.02%). When compared with NR, the grain yield increased by 8.09% with incorporation of LR and 1.37% with CR with higher fractional contributions of ear and grain number than grain weight. Similarly, maize grain yield also increased by 44.91, 42.40, 29.81 and 6.64% by application of 160, 120, 80 and 40 kg N ha-1. Canopy radiation use efficiency (RUE) also increased in similar trend as for grain yield under given treatments. Interaction was significant (p<0.05) for grain yield in 2011 and for two years average. Two years average data also showed markedly higher (p<0.05) grain yield under LR than CR or NR treatments. Similarly, as compared to control and N-rate 40 kg ha-1 , the 80 and 120 kg N ha-1 showed significantly marked changes in yield with highest in LR, followed by CR and lowest by NR. For interaction, the yield difference with treatments was mainly associated with ear number and to some extent in 1000 grain weight. The study suggests that 5 t ha-1 residue (legume > cereals > No residue) with 120 kg N ha-1 when incorporated deeply in soil has long lasting favorably positive response on crop yield and soil fertility in regularly cultivated cereal based rotation.

Influence of Various Tillage Practices on Soil Physical Properties and Wheat Performance in Different Wheat-based Cropping Systems

“…In wheat-based cropping systems, the continuous use of conventional tillage for preparing seedbed leads to the development of a plough pan. This plough pan may influence the crop productivity by altering soil physical properties (Bertolino et al, 2010;Akmal et al, 2015) and developing penetration resistance up to tilled depth (Micucci and Taboada, 2006). Plough pan layers are located shallow than the normal rooting depth and may become a barrier for roots due to low porosity and too high mechanical impedance (Bruand et al, 2004).…”

Short-term trade-offs of organic matter management strategies for smallholder farms

“…These soil characteristics include soil carbon, soil water-holding capacity, nutrient storage and availability (Birhane et al, 2018;Beuschel et al, 2019;Bu et al, 2020). In addition, the application of OMM strategies reduces soil compaction and increases crop productivity (Lupwayi et al, 2011;Akmal et al, 2015;Birhane et al, 2018;Beuschel et al, 2019;Bu et al, 2020). Organic matter management therefore, to a certain degree reduces the dependency on mineral fertilizers but also acts as a precondition for optimal utilization and uptake of nutrients by plants (De Moura et al, 2010;Pirhofer-Walzl et al, 2012).…”

“…This could specifically be the case if more than two strategies (for example the application of grain and forage legumes, alley trees, and FYM) are jointly applied. While the positive influence of single OMM strategies is well known and studied (Akmal et al, 2015;Yengwe et al, 2018;Bu et al, 2020), literature on the impact of combined OMM strategies on yield and economic parameters is limited. Moreover, training and advisory services have not been sufficient in extending related information to farmers (Sebaggala and Matovu, 2020).…”

Influence of tillage depth of a cultivator on the incorporation of crop residues of winter barley in a chernozem soil

“…In some publications, the influence of the TD has been examined, but in the end, only two different soil tillage implements have been compared. So, for example, Akmal et al (2015) investigated the effect of TD on maize yield, but only compared a plough (deep tillage) with a cultivator (shallow tillage). Hänsel et al (2009), on the other hand, compared the influence of three cultivator depths (0.05, 0.10, and 0.15 m) only on residue coverage and various soil properties but not straw incor- poration.…”