Effects of Residue Cover on Pesticide Losses from Conventional and No-Tillage Systems

Kenimer, L.; Mostaghimi, S.; Young, R. W.; Dillaha, Theo A.; Shanholtz, V. O.

doi:10.13031/2013.30505

Cited by 39 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, in some studies, pesticide concentrations in runoff from conservation tillage plots, especially no-tillage plots, were higher than in runoff from conventional tillage plots. As a consequence, conservation tillage plots may generate greater pesticide losses despite a lower water runoff volume (Heatwole et al, 1997;Kenimer et al, 1987;Shipitalo and Owens, 2006;Webster and Shaw, 1996). In other studies, water runoff volume was higher under conservation tillage (Gaynor et al, 1995;Myers et al, 1995).…”

Section: Runoffmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Several studies indicated that conservation tillage was inefficient in controlling runoff when heavy rainfall occurs quickly after pesticide application (Rector et al, 2003;Shipitalo and Owens, 2003;Shipitalo and Owens, 2006). Moreover, most pesticide loss by Felsot et al, 1990) Alachlor 3.36 --941, 1158, 824, 926, 1029, 860 5, 6, 7, 18, -, 1 1, 4, 7, 18, 18 -50, 35-38 31-56, 35-48 16-24, 34-47 2.2-9.4, 2.1-4.7 1.7-8.1, 1.9-2.5 0.5-1.6, 1.7-3.0 (Myers et al, 1995) Atrazine 0.9 0.9 Inc. (Malone et al, 1996) 392 L. Alletto et al (Kenimer et al, 1987) 1 Codes of tillage practices are reported in Table I. Loc: seed row localisation of the pesticide treatment.…”

Section: Runoffmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tillage management effects on pesticide fate in soils. A review

Alletto

Coquet

Benoît

et al. 2010

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Reducing tillage intensity through the implementation of conservation practices is a way to reach a more sustainable agriculture. Reducing tillage is indeed an efficient way to control soil erosion and to decrease production costs. Nonetheless, the environmental impact of reduced tillage is not well known because conservation techniques may induce strong changes in soil physicochemical properties and biological activity. Knowledge on the fate of applied pesticides under conservation practices is particularly important from this point of view. We review here the advances in the understanding, quantification and prediction of the effects of tillage on pesticide fate in soils. We found the following major points: (1) for most dissipation processes such as retention, degradation and transfer, results of pesticide behaviour studies in soils are highly variable and sometimes contradictory. This variability is partially explained by the multiplicity of processes and contributive factors, by the variety of their interactions, and by their complex temporal and spatial dynamics. In addition, the lack of a thorough description of tillage systems and sampling strategy in most reports hampers any comprehensive interpretation of this variability. (2) Implementation of conservation tillage induces an increase in organic matter content at the soil surface and its gradual decrease with depth. This, in turn, leads to an increase in pesticide retention in the topsoil layer. (3) Increasing retention of pesticides in the topsoil layer under conservation tillage decreases the availability of the pesticides for biological degradation. This competition between retention and degradation leads to a higher persistence of pesticides in soils, though this persistence can be partially compensated for by a more intensive microbial activity under conservation tillage. (4) Despite strong changes in soil physical properties under conservation tillage, pesticide transfer is more influenced by initial soil conditions and climatic conditions than by tillage. Conservation tillage systems such as no-tillage improve macropore connectivity, which in turn increases pesticide leaching. We conclude that more knowledge is needed to fully understand the temporal and spatial dynamics of pesticide in soil, especially preferential flows, in order to improve the assessment of pesticide risks, and their relation to tillage management.

show abstract

Section: Runoffmentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Runoffmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tillage management effects on pesticide fate in soils. A review

Alletto

Coquet

Benoît

et al. 2010

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Chisel plow tillage can leave as low as 30% of the crop residue as surface cover compared with as high as 90% left with no-till (Andraski et al, 1985). The higher residue levels maintained with no-till can affect the water distribution components by increasing infiltration and reducing runoff and erosion (Kenimer et al, 1987;Edwards et al, 1988). Chisel plow mixes crop residue with the soil during its W operation, so there will be a different soil water regime than that maintained in the soil with a no-till system (Green et al, 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cropping System Effects on No3n Loss With Subsurface Drainage Water

Bakhsh¹,

Kanwar²,

Bailey³

et al. 2002

Transactions of the ASAE

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An appropriate combination of tillage and nitrogen management practices will be necessary to develop sustainable farming practices. A six-year (1993)(1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998) field study was conducted on subsurface-drained Clyde-Kenyon-Floyd soils to quantify the impact of two tillage systems (chisel plow vs. no tillage) and two N fertilizer management practices (preplant single application vs. late-spring soil test based application) on nitrate-nitrogen (NO3-N) leaching loss with subsurface drain discharge from corn (Zea mays L.) soybean (Glycine max L.) rotation plots. Preplant injected urea ammonium nitrate solution (UAN) fertilizer was applied at the rate of 110 kg ha-1 to chisel plow and no-till corn plots, while the late-spring N application rate averaged 179 and 156 kg ha-1 for the no-till and chisel plow corn plots, respectively. Data on subsurface drainage flow volume, NO3-N concentrations in subsurface drainage water, NO3-N loss with subsurface drainage flow, and crop yield were collected and analyzed using a randomized complete block design. Differences in subsurface drainage flow volume due to annual variations in rainfall significantly (P = 0.05) affected the NO3-N loss with subsurface drainage flows. High correlation (R2 = 0.89) between annual subsurface drainage flow volume and the annual NO3-N leaching loss with subsurface drainage water was observed. The flow-weighted average annual NO3-N concentrations varied from a low of 6.8 mg L-1 in 1994 to a high of 13.9 mg L-1 in 1996. Results of this study indicated that NO3-N losses from the chisel plow plots were 16% (16 vs. 19 kg-N ha-1) lower in comparison with no-till plots, while corn grain yield was 11% higher in the chisel plow plots (8.3 vs. 7.5 Mg ha-1). Late-spring N application applied as a sidedress resulted in 25% lower NO3-N leaching losses with subsurface drainage water in comparison with preplant single N application and also significantly (P = 0.5) higher corn grain yield by 13% (8.4 vs. 7.4 Mg ha-1). These results clearly demonstrate that chisel plow tillage with late-spring soil test based N application for corn after soybean can be a sustainable farming practice for the northeast part of Iowa.

show abstract

“…This is largely due to less movement of soluble herbicides in surface water when runoffis reduced and less movement of tightly adsorbed herbicides in sediment or with wind blown soil particles when erosion is reduced. There is some potential for conservation tillage to increase water infiltration and thus herbicide leaching into groundwater (Kenimer et al 1987;Fawcett et al 1994). However, some studies have found zero tillage reduced leaching of pesticides, possibly because intact soil macropores allowed water to move through the soil without going through soil aggregates to leach out pesticides (Fennanich and Daniel l99l; Fawcett et al1994 t.9 x lG{ 1.9 x l0-7 1.3 x l0-5 5.8 x l0-5 1.0 x l0-5 1.0 x l0-7 1.6 x l0-7 l.l x lG4 l.l x lG4 zValues raken from Keamey and Kaufman (1975) (Glotfelty 1987;Fawcett et al 1994 Wf,ile classical biological control agents have been used for the control of range and pasture weeds they should not be limited to these habitats (Watson 1991), and it may be Dossible to apply these agents in zero-tillage situations L"""rr.e of reduced levels of soil disturbance.…”

Section: Derksenetal_sympostumon9u9tainablecbopplng6ssmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability, conservation tillage and weeds in Canada

Derksen¹,

Blackshaw²,

Boyetchko³

1996

Can. J. Plant Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

S. M. 1996. Sustainability, conservation tillage, and weeds in Canada. Can' J. plant . Tire sustainability of conservation tillage is dependent on the extent of changes in weed community composition, the usage of herbicides, and the development of intelated weed management (IWM) strategies, including-biological weed control. ThE objective of this paper is to review research on conservation tillage and weed. management in light of these factors. Recent Canadian research traifound that changes in weed communities due to the adoption of,conservation tillage are not necessarily those expected and were not consistant 6y species, location, 9r year. Changes reflected the use of different selection pressures, such as different crop rotations and herbiiides, within the studies to a greater extent than weed life cycle groupings' iherefore, research that determines the reasons for change or the lack ofchange in weed communities.is required to provide,the scientiflrc basis for the development of IWM strategies. documented herbicide usage in conserv_ation tillage varies from less than to more than conventional-tillage systems. Potentia'l to reduce herbicide usage in conservation-tillage systems

show abstract

Effects of Residue Cover on Pesticide Losses from Conventional and No-Tillage Systems

Cited by 39 publications

References 0 publications

Tillage management effects on pesticide fate in soils. A review

Tillage management effects on pesticide fate in soils. A review

Cropping System Effects on No3n Loss With Subsurface Drainage Water

Sustainability, conservation tillage and weeds in Canada

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Effects of Residue Cover on Pesticide Losses from Conventional and No-Tillage Systems

Cited by 39 publications

References 0 publications

Tillage management effects on pesticide fate in soils. A review

Tillage management effects on pesticide fate in soils. A review

Cropping System Effects on No3n Loss With Subsurface Drainage Water

Sustainability, conservation tillage and weeds in Canada

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Cropping System Effects on No3n Loss With Subsurface Drainage Water