Physical properties of a Chernozemic clay loam soil under long-term conventional tillage and no-till

Abstract

a Chernozemic clay loam soil under long-term conventional tillage and no-till. Can. J. Soil Sci. 79: 325-331. Conservation tillage practices such as no-till (NT) and conventional tillage (CT) with a heavy-duty cultivator can influence the physical properties of soils. This study was conducted to determine the effect of 24 yr of NT versus CT on the physical properties of a clay loam soil in southern Alberta. Physical properties quantified were bulk density (BD), mean weight diameter (MWD), plant-available water-holding capacity (PAWHC), saturated hydraulic conductivity (K sat ), soil water characteristic [θ θ(ψ ψ)] and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity [K(ψ ψ)] relationships, and pore-size distribution (PSD). Bulk soil samples and small soil cores (5-cm depth increments to 20 cm) were taken from CT and NT fields in 1992, and tension infiltrometer measurements were made in 1994. The results from this study are reported as general trends for the tillage fields. Statistical probability levels are not reported because of the unreplicated nature of the experiment, the limited number of sampling locations within each tillage field, and to a lesser extent, the different sampling times for CT and NT in 1992. Plant-available water-holding capacity was higher for the CT field (14.3%) than the NT field (10.8%), and a greater amount of water was held at a given water potential (-1500 to -1.5 kPa) for the former, indicating a higher potential for soil water conservation under conventional tillage. Geometric mean K sat values (small soil cores) were higher for the NT field (18.20 × 10 -6 m s -1 ) than the CT field (1.74 × 10 -6 m s -1 ). The K(ψ) values (small soil cores) between -10 and -2 kPa were higher for the CT field than the NT field at the 0-to 5-cm, 10-to 15-cm and 15-to 20-cm depths, but values were higher for the NT field at the 5-to 10-cm depth. Near-saturated K(ψ) values (-1.5 to -0.3 kPa) of the surface soil, as derived from tension infiltration measurements in 1994, were higher for the CT field (2.43 × 10 -7 m s -1 ) than for the NT field (6.09 × 10 -8 m s -1 ). There was a greater percentage volume of larger pores (30-40, 40-67, 67-200, >200 µm) for the NT field than for the CT field, and there was a lower percentage volume of smaller pores (0.2-0.6, 0.6-4 µm) for the CT field than for the NT field. Differences in certain soil physical properties between CT and NT fields may be related to the lag time between the most recent tillage event and sampling for the CT field.Key words: Conservation tillage, heavy-duty cultivator, physical attributes, soil water, hydraulic conductivity, porosity Miller, J. J., Larney, F. J. et Lindwall, C. W. 1999. Propriétés physiques d'un loam argileux tchernozémique exposé à long terme à des régimes de travail classique ou de semis direct. Can. J. Soil Sci. 79: 325-331. Les pratiques de travail de conservation du sol, tel le semis direct (SD), et les méthodes de travail classique (TC) utilisant le cultivateur lourd peuvent influer sur les propriétés physiques du sol. L'objet de nos...

Two-dimensional spatial variation of soil physical properties in two tillage systems

“…Under conservation tillage with 5 yr without ploughing, soil physical properties have relatively low variability compared to other results using similar soil tillage (Miller et al, 1999). As for CT, an effect of wheel traffic on q b (P < 0.001) was found with the highest values under trafficked inter-rows as also reported by Vervoort et al (2001) and Blanco-Canqui et al (2004).…”

“…Under conservation tillage with 5 yr without ploughing, soil physical properties have relatively low variability compared to other results using similar soil tillage (Miller et al. , 1999).…”

Conventional and Conservation Tillage: Influence on Seasonal Runoff, Sediment, and Nutrient Losses in the Canadian Prairies

“…Loftis et al (2001) suggest that the greatest power of the paired watershed approach is obtained when the sample sizes for the calibration and treatment periods are approximately equal. Because it can take a number of years after conversion to a conservation tillage system for the soil to “stabilize” (Perfect et al, 1990; Miller et al, 1999), the data were separated into three principal time periods: (i) preconversion/calibration (1993–1996), (ii) postconversion‐transitional (1997–2003), and (iii) postconversion‐treatment (2004–2007) (Table 1). This gave calibration and treatment periods of equal length for analysis.…”

Greenhouse gas contributions and mitigation potential of agricultural practices in northwestern USA and western Canada

“…Table 2 grouped within 15-yr time steps. Campbell et al (1996a), Campbell et al (1996b), Campbell et al (1995), Larney et al (1997), Nyborg et al (1995), Campbell et al (2001), Grant andLaFond, 1994, McConkey et al (2003), Hao et al (2001a), Elliott and Efetha (1999); Dormaar and Carefoot (1998), Franzluebbers and Arshad (1996), Miller et al (1999), Angers et al (1997), Campbell et al (1991), Bremer et al (1994), Campbell et al (1998), Biederbeck et al (1998), Campbell et al (2000a, Campbell et al (2000b), Campbell and Zentner (1993), Bremer et al (2002), Nyborg et al (1998), Nyborg et al (1999), Malhi et al (1997), Solberg et al (1997), Liang and Mackenzie (1992), Gregorich et al (1996), Malhi et al (2002), and Izaurralde et al (2001).…”