Crop and pasture rotations at Coonalpyn, South Australia: effects on soil-borne diseases, soil nitrogen and cereal production

King, PM

doi:10.1071/ea9840555

Cited by 20 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In other experiments, WUE by wheat following a legume crop has been shown to be higher due to lower incidence and severity of soil-borne disease than in continuous wheat cropping (King 1984). Besides common root rot (Table 4) and low incidence or absence of crown rot of wheat in this study, the other known soilborne disease in the region, root lesions caused by root lesion nematodes (Pratylenchus thornei) was absent from the experimental site.…”

Section: Water-use Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 39%

Sustaining productivity of a Vertisol at Warra, Queensland, with fertilisers, no-tillage, or legumes. 5. Wheat yields, nitrogen benefits and water-use efficiency of chickpea-wheat rotation

Dalal¹,

Strong²,

Weston³

et al. 1998

Aust. J. Exp. Agric.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary. In this study, the benefits of chickpea–wheat rotation compared with continuous wheat cropping (wheat–wheat rotation) were evaluated for their effects on soil nitrate nitrogen, wheat grain yields and grain protein concentrations, and water-use efficiency at Warra, southern Queensland from 1988 to 1996. Benefits in terms of wheat grain yields varied, from 17% in 1993 to 61% in 1990, with a mean increase in grain yield of 40% (825 kg/ha). Wheat grain protein concentration increased from 9.4% in a wheat–wheat rotation to 10.7% in a chickpea–wheat rotation, almost a 14% increase in grain protein. There was a mean increase in soil nitrate nitrogen of 35 kg N/ha.1.2 m after 6 months of fallow following chickpea (85 kg N/ha) compared with continuous wheat cropping (50 kg N/ha). This was reflected in additional nitrogen in the wheat grain (20 kg N/ha) and above-ground plant biomass (25 kg N/ha) following chickpea. Water-use efficiency by wheat increased from a mean value of 9.2 kg grain/ha. mm in a wheat–wheat rotation to 11.7 kg grain/ha.mm in a chickpea–wheat rotation. The water-use efficiency values were closely correlated with presowing nitrate nitrogen, and showed no marked distinction between the 2 cropping sequences. Although presowing available water in soil in May was similar in both the chickpea–wheat rotation and the wheat–wheat rotation in all years except 1996, wheat in the former used about 20 mm additional water and enhanced water-use efficiency. Thus, by improving soil fertility through restorative practices such as incorporating chickpea in rotation, water-use efficiency can be enhanced and consequently water runoff losses reduced. Furthermore, beneficial effects of chickpea in rotation with cereals could be enhanced by early to mid sowing (May–mid June) of chickpea, accompanied by zero tillage practice. Wheat of ‘Prime Hard’ grade protein (≥13%) could be obtained in chickpea–wheat rotation by supplementary application of fertiliser N to wheat. In this study, incidence of crown rot of wheat caused by Fusarium graminearum was negligible, and incidence and severity of common root rot of wheat caused by Bipolaris sorokiniana were essentially similar in both cropping sequences and inversely related to the available water in soil at sowing. No other soil-borne disease was observed. Therefore, beneficial effects of chickpea on wheat yields and grain protein were primarily due to additional nitrate nitrogen following the legume crop and consequently better water-use efficiency.

show abstract

Section: Water-use Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 39%

Sustaining productivity of a Vertisol at Warra, Queensland, with fertilisers, no-tillage, or legumes. 5. Wheat yields, nitrogen benefits and water-use efficiency of chickpea-wheat rotation

Dalal¹,

Strong²,

Weston³

et al. 1998

Aust. J. Exp. Agric.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, L. angustijolius is well adapted to deep sandy soils (Gladstones 1970), while L. pilosus is most frequently found on fine-textured soils (Plitmann et al 1979). Peas also rely on a finely branched root system with a poor taproot (Hamblin and Hamblin 1985) and yield better than lupins on shallow, fine-textured soils but poorer on deep sandy soils (Laurence 1977;King 1984;French 1987).…”

Section: Rooting Pattern and Phenologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil and plant factors relating to the poor growth of Lupinus species on fine-textured, alkaline soils - a review

White¹

1990

Aust. J. Agric. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil type is an important factor affecting the growth of lupins. Successful lupin cultivation is generally restricted to deep, acid to neutral, coarse-textured soils. Very little is known about the factors affecting the performance of lupins on other soil types. This review attempts to define the major factors controlling the growth of lupins of fine-textured, alkaline soils, with a view to providing a focus for future research.Wild populations of the genus, as a whole, occupy soils of a wide pH and textural range (pH 4-8.5, texture ranging from coarse sands to fine clays), although the majority of populations are found on light soils of sandy loam or loamy sand texture with pH values between 5.5 and 7. Species within the genus have distinct preferences for soils of a narrower range than the genus as a whole. Commercially cultivated species appear to be adapted to a narrower range of soil types than the wild species.Iron nutrition, seedling emergence, and rooting pattern and phenology are the major factors influencing the performance of lupins on fine-textured, alkaline soils. Lupins appear to possess some mechanisms thought to enhance the availability of Fe, nevertheless they suffer severely from Fe deficiency. Conditions prevailing on fine-textured, alkaline soils (poor drainage and aeration, CaC03) are frequently conducive to Fe deficiency. The epigeal pattern of emergence of lupins is unsuitable to fine-textured soils, particularly if crust formation occurs. The rooting pattern and phenology of lupins is better suited to deep sandy soils than shallow, fine-textured soils, and this exacerbates late-season water stress.A better understanding of these factors may allow breeding and management strategies to be developed which will extend lupin cultivation to a wider range of soils.

show abstract

“…has expanded rapidly, 60,000 ha in 1989 compared to 6000 in 1986. This has resulted from an appreciation of their seed yield potential in this environment (French and Ewing, 1989) and of their rotational benefits (King, 1984). A major limiting factor in pea production is the incidence of fungal root rot (Hagedorn, 1984;Reiling et al, 1960) and it is likely to become important in W.A.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of fertilizers on root rot of field peas caused by Fusarium oxysporum, Pythium vexans and Rhizoctonia solani inoculated singly or in combination

Srihuttagum

Sivasithamparam

1991

Plant Soil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In field peas the application of nitrogen plus phosphorus, phosphorus plus potassium or nitrogen plus phosphorus plus potassium were effective in reducing severity of root rot caused by Rhizoctonia solani and with the combination of nitrogen plus phosphorus plus potassium in the case of Fusarium oxysporum. The fertilizers tested did not reduce disease caused by Pythium vexans or a combination of all pathogens.

show abstract

Crop and pasture rotations at Coonalpyn, South Australia: effects on soil-borne diseases, soil nitrogen and cereal production

Cited by 20 publications

References 8 publications

Sustaining productivity of a Vertisol at Warra, Queensland, with fertilisers, no-tillage, or legumes. 5. Wheat yields, nitrogen benefits and water-use efficiency of chickpea-wheat rotation

Sustaining productivity of a Vertisol at Warra, Queensland, with fertilisers, no-tillage, or legumes. 5. Wheat yields, nitrogen benefits and water-use efficiency of chickpea-wheat rotation

Soil and plant factors relating to the poor growth of Lupinus species on fine-textured, alkaline soils - a review

The influence of fertilizers on root rot of field peas caused by Fusarium oxysporum, Pythium vexans and Rhizoctonia solani inoculated singly or in combination

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About