Soil Benefits and Yield Limitations of Cover Crop Use in Texas High Plains Cotton

Lewis, Katie L.; Burke, Joseph A.; Keeling, Will; Mitchell-McCallister, Donna; DeLaune, Paul B.; Keeling, J. Wayne

doi:10.2134/agronj2018.02.0092

Cited by 51 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The surface soil has a pH of 7.5 and is ∼70% sand (USDA‐NRCS, 2016). Additional information of initial soil characterization is described in Lewis et al (2018). In brief, conservation tillage was established in 1998 to compare monoculture cotton production using conventional tillage (CT)‐winter fallow and NT with cereal rye ( Secale cereale L.) cover.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal Variability of Soil Carbon and Nitrogen in Cotton Production on the Texas High Plains

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soil organic carbon (SOC) is a key indicator of soil health as it is important in essential soil functions related to nutrient cycling and soil productivity. Although, it can take several decades to increase SOC in semi‐arid ecoregions, it is possible that the low organic matter background in sandy soils typical of semi‐arid soils may show greater fluctuations compared to soils from other regions. This study was conducted to evaluate the temporal C and N dynamics of cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) cropping systems in a semi‐arid region. The effects of no‐tillage (NT) and cover crop use on SOC, potassium permanganate oxidizable carbon (POXC), inorganic nitrogen (Ninorg), and microbial respiration were investigated in a long‐term study (∼19 yr) at Lamesa, TX, comparing conventional tillage (CT), winter fallow, to no‐tillage rye cover (R‐NT), and no‐tillage mixed species cover (M‐NT) on an Amarillo fine sandy loam. Results showed SOC and POXC were greatest during periods of active cover crop and cotton root growth. Soil organic C and POXC were significantly correlated (R2 = 0.75; p < 0.0001), but poorly correlated to microbial respiration (R2 = 0.41, p = 0.0001; and R2 = 0.02, p = 0.8781, respectively). Conservation management practices did not impact Ninorg. Soil organic C and POXC levels were more variable than previously reported and responded to active root growth in this semi‐arid, sandy soil. Core Ideas Soil organic C and K permanganate oxidizable C were more temporally variable than previously reported. Soil organic C and K permanganate oxidizable C were greatest during active cover than fallow periods. Long‐term conservation management did not significantly increase inorganic N.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Temporal Variability of Soil Carbon and Nitrogen in Cotton Production on the Texas High Plains

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies have reviewed the adoption of NT in the United States (Prokopy et al., ; Ranjan, Church, Floress, & Prokopy, ) and concluded that NT resulted in improvements in soil properties, greater cropping intensity, and higher crop productivity (Hansen, Allen, Baumhardt, & Lyon, ; Wallace et al., ). Agronomic and economic influences of cover crop adoption have been evaluated in studies of different cropping systems (Lewis et al., ; Schomberg et al., ; Zhou, Larson, Boyer, Roberts, & Tyler, ). The outcomes of these studies varied across regions and were affected by other farm practices, such as fertilizer application and crop rotation (Marcillo & Miguez, ; Miguez & Bollero, ; Ranjan et al., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lewis et al. () evaluated the impact of conservation tillage and cover crops used in cotton production in north Texas, and found that cotton lint revenue and gross margins of CT were greater than conservation tillage. Based on a long‐term cotton experiment with various winter cover crops (wheat, hairy vetch [ Vicia villosa L.], and crimson clover [ Trifolium incarnatum L.]) and tillage treatments (till vs. NT) in Tennessee, Zhou et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Varner, Epplin, and Strickland (2011) compared the profitability of NT and conventional tillage (CT) for cotton, grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L.), and wheat (Triticum asestivum L.) in Southwest Oklahoma, and they concluded that the net returns were slightly greater for NT than CT for wheat, while there was no difference for the other cropping systems. Lewis et al (2018) evaluated the impact of conservation tillage and cover crops used in cotton production in north Texas, and found that cotton lint revenue and gross margins of CT were greater than conservation tillage. Based on a long-term cotton experiment with various Core Ideas • Cover crops increased the probability of positive net returns with an interval of $760-1370 ha −1 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Economic analysis of adopting no‐till and cover crops in irrigated cotton production under risk

Fan¹,

Liu

DeLaune³

et al. 2020

Agronomy Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Adoption of soil conservation practices has been promoted to improve environmental and economic benefits across the United States. These practices are especially necessary for soil health improvement in the Southern High Plains where soils are prone to erosion and agricultural irrigation relies heavily on groundwater. Winter cover crops and no‐till cropping are two conservation practices for reducing soil erosion, but producers might face additional risks associated with adopting these practices. The objective of this study was to examine the profitability and risks associated with alternative tillage and cover crops (no cover crop, winter wheat [Triticum asestivum L.], and grass–legume mixture) for irrigated cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Using data from a 6‐yr field experiment, net return distributions of each production system were evaluated and ranked across various risk aversion levels. The results showed that the average net returns were $1040 and $1049 ha−1 for conventionally tilled and no‐till cotton without a cover crop, while the net returns were $1121 and $1075 ha−1 for no‐till cotton with wheat and mixed cover crops, respectively. Producers adopting cover crops had a greater probability of getting a middle interval of net returns between $760 and $1370 ha−1. The results of risk analysis show that risk‐neutral and slightly risk‐averse producers prefer no‐till cotton production with wheat cover, while no‐till with mixed and wheat cover are the first and second most preferred systems for very and extremely risk‐averse producers. Sensitivity analysis confirms consistent profit effects of cover crops and no‐till adoption at multiple cotton price levels.

show abstract

“…Oftentimes, conservation tillage and cover crops are adopted together to control input costs and augment environmental and economic benefits (Schomberg et al., 2014). Great efforts have been made to enhance soil health through conservation tillage and cover crop usage (Cochran, Roberts, Larson, & Tyler, 2007; Lewis et al., 2018). Compared to conventional tillage, conservation tillage, including no‐till and reduced tillage, reduces soil erosion, decreases input costs, and sustains long‐term farm productivity (Pittelkow et al., 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Net return and risk analysis of winter cover crops in dryland cotton systems

Fan¹,

Liu

DeLaune³

et al. 2020

Agronomy Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Winter cover crop and no-till are two promising conservation practices to reduce soil erosion and promote long-term sustainability. This research evaluates the net returns of two different tillage methods and five cover crop treatments in dryland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) production and identifies risk-efficient tillage and cover crop management practices. Four-year field experiments (2013−2016) were conducted for a continuous cotton production system under conventional tillage and no-till without a cover crop, as well as no-till with cover crops including winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), crimson clover (Trifolium incarnatum L.), Austrian winter field pea (Pisum sativum L.), hairy vetch (Vicia villosa Roth), and mixed cover crops. Results showed no statistical differences in lint yields (P = .98) or net returns (P = .82). No-till with crimson clover decreased yield variation compared to conventional tillage, while hairy vetch and mixed cover crops increased yield variation. The average net returns were US$454 and $461 ha −1 for conventional tillage and no-till without a cover crop, respectively. The average net returns ranged from $346 to $389 ha −1 for the cover crop treatments. Producers have a higher probability of getting a higher net return if switching from conventional tillage to no-till. The risk analysis results showed that no-till without a cover crop was the most preferred practice by risk-neutral, somewhat and rather risk-averse producers. For very and extremely risk-averse producers, no-till with crimson clover was the most preferred management practice.

show abstract

Soil Benefits and Yield Limitations of Cover Crop Use in Texas High Plains Cotton

Cited by 51 publications

References 42 publications

Temporal Variability of Soil Carbon and Nitrogen in Cotton Production on the Texas High Plains

Temporal Variability of Soil Carbon and Nitrogen in Cotton Production on the Texas High Plains

Economic analysis of adopting no‐till and cover crops in irrigated cotton production under risk

Net return and risk analysis of winter cover crops in dryland cotton systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About