Crop yield evaluation under controlled drainage in Ohio, United States

Abstract

Controlled drainage (CD) is an important practice for reducing nutrient loading to surface water bodies across the midwestern United States. There may also be a positive crop yield benefit, which could add an incentive for adoption of this practice.The objective of this multienvironment trial was to assess yield stability and yield performance of CD in northwest Ohio, United States. The trial was a split-plot experiment with environments as whole plots (randomization unit). The main plot factor was crop w^ith three levels: corn {Zea mays L.), popcorn (Zea mays L. var. everta), and soybean (Glycine max [L.] Merr.).The subplot factor was drainage management with two levels: conventional fi-ee drainage (FD) and CD. The design of the main plot factor was a completely randomized design. Mixed model analysis showed that CD management produced a statistically greater (p-value = 0.0246) crop yield compared to FD management over 23 site-year environments during 2008 to 2011. Interaction between drainage management and crop was not significant, implying that CD management had the same yield-increasing effect for all crops.The CD management provided 3.3%, 3.1%, and 2.1% greater yield for corn, popcorn and soybean, respectively, relative to the FD management.The stability analysis based on 23 environments suggested that the drainage managements were not different in yield stability, though a larger number of environments are needed to make a more accurate assessment of yield stability. Area of influence analysis indicated that CD can provide more profit than FD for relatively flat fields where the influence of CD extends over the entire field. In conclusion, CD provided crop yield advantage over FD across different environments in northwest Ohio.

Satellite and in situ derived corn and soybean biomass and leaf area index: Response to controlled tile drainage under varying weather conditions

“…In all the years of that study, the effect of CTD was always positive for corn and soybean, but for wheat the effect was negative in 3 of the 5 study years. Ghane et al (2012) reported average yield increases of 3.3%, 3.1% and 2.1% respectively, for corn, popcorn and soybean under CTD management relative to fields under UCTD management. For corn, yield increased between 0.4% and 14.2% in 6 of the 8 site-years, while yield reduction was 0.5% and 3.2% in the two remaining site-years (Ghane et al, 2012).…”

“…Ghane et al (2012) reported average yield increases of 3.3%, 3.1% and 2.1% respectively, for corn, popcorn and soybean under CTD management relative to fields under UCTD management. For corn, yield increased between 0.4% and 14.2% in 6 of the 8 site-years, while yield reduction was 0.5% and 3.2% in the two remaining site-years (Ghane et al, 2012). Soybean fields under CTD management had yield increases between 0.7% and 12.7% in 10 of the 12 site-years; yield reduction was 1.3% and 9% in the two remaining site-years (Ghane et al, 2012).…”

“…A few studies have highlighted the importance of the timing and amount of rainfall for variations in crop yield under CTD management (e.g. Delbecq et al, 2012;Ghane et al, 2012), but no reports were found on the effects of CTD management with respect to crop growth and development under varying growing season weather conditions. Such information can be seen as particularly important for identifying when CTD impact on crop is acute, and for defining how to optimize tile drainage control during the growing season.…”

Drainage water management

“…In some cases (Jaynes 2012;Helmers et al 2012), the demonstration sites were established consistent with a field research approach, where the effect of DWM could be compared to conventional drainage in well-instrumented, field-scale, replicated plots. In others (Cooke and Verma 2012;Ghane et al 2012;Adeuya et al 2012), paired DWM and conventionally drained sites were established on farmer-operated, production-scale fields, located on a range of soils and conditions across a wide region of a state. There are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches.…”

Long-Term Monitoring of Waterborne Pathogens and Microbial Source Tracking Markers in Paired Agricultural Watersheds under Controlled and Conventional Tile Drainage Management

“…Documented benefits of the practice include reduced export of agricultural contaminants from fields to surface water systems (4,(13)(14)(15) as well as improved crop yields as a result of the conservation of nutrients and water (16). Controlled tile drainage, which is part of a family of drainage water management practices (17), is a practice that is increasing in use worldwide.…”