Tillage Effects on Soil Quality after Three Years of Irrigation in Northern Spain

Apesteguía, Marcos; Virto, Iñigo; Orcaray, Luis; Bescansa, Paloma; Enrique, Alberto; Imaz, M.J.; Karlen, Douglas L.

doi:10.3390/su9081476

Cited by 20 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our study, the lack of significant relationships between SQI and crop yields is likely a result of the overall reduced variation in SQI values across rotations and bio‐covers, suggesting that the differences in SQ between treatments were not enough to explain the variation in crop productivity. Moreover, poultry litter increased crop yields across locations (Ashworth et al., 2016a, 2016b; 2017a), but affected negatively SQ in the 0‐ to 15‐cm soil depth (Table 6), particularly under continuous cotton, cotton–corn, and continuous corn rotations (Figure 1). As previously discussed, poultry litter is known as a valuable source of nutrients, but its continuous application may impair water quality due to potential nutrient runoff.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These results suggest that significant differences were dependent on the model applied for SQ analysis (across depths or per depth). Usually, SQ assessments using SMAF are performed separately per depth (Jokela, Posner, Hedtcke, Balser, & Read, 2011; Karlen, Cambardella, Kovar, & Colvin, 2013; Apesteguia et al., 2017; Cherubin et al., 2016; Veum et al., 2015), due to organic matter and fertility gradients that occur within the soil profile. The absence of significant interactions when analyzing SQ across depths was unexpected, as an increased number of observations ( n = 270) would be more prone to show statistical differences compared with the analysis per depth ( n = 135).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Soil quality indices based on long‐term conservation cropping systems management

Amorim

Ashworth

Wienhold

et al. 2020

Agrosystems Geosci & Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Soil Management Assessment Framework (SMAF) may provide insight into how conservation practices affect soil quality (SQ) regionally. Therefore, we aimed to quantify SQ in a long‐term (15‐yr) crop rotation and bio‐covers experiment under no‐tillage using SMAF. Main effects were cropping rotations of soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.], corn (Zea mays L.), and cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Split‐block bio‐cover treatments consisted of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), Austrian winter pea (Pisum sativum L. sativum var. arvense), hairy vetch (Vicia villosa Roth), poultry litter, and fallow (control). Seven SQ indicators—soil pH, total organic carbon (TOC), bulk density (BD), soil extractable P and K, electrical conductivity (EC), and sodium adsorption ration (SAR)—were scored using SMAF algorithms, and investigated individually and as an overall soil quality index (SQI). Simple linear regressions were performed between SQI and crop yields. Differences (p < .05) in SQI within rotations varied when analyzed across and by depth. Overall, cotton–corn and/or continuous corn had greater SQI than soybean‐based rotations. Poultry litter had the greatest TOC, pH, K, and BD scores at the 0‐ to 15‐cm soil depth, and the lowest SQI. Reductions in SQI within bio‐covers were linked to P scores. A positive relationship was found between SQI and cotton yield at the 15‐ to 30‐cm soil depth (R2 = .48; p < .05). Investigating SMAF scores individually and separately per depth addresses the effects of long‐term conservation practices on SQ. Overall, SMAF can be used to develop best management practices and nutrient management strategies.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil quality indices based on long‐term conservation cropping systems management

Amorim

Ashworth

Wienhold

et al. 2020

Agrosystems Geosci & Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Under field conditions, the chemical and physical effects of irrigation water can vary with several factors [e.g. 2,56,57,58,59] such as drainage provisions, leaching fractions of soil layers, soil tillage conditions (cultivated vs notillage), and also methods of irrigation (flood irrigation, sprinkler or drip irrigation). Combining all these factors in the models, used for predicting the sustainability of irrigation, will be necessary to arrive at a practical approach to mitigate irrigation water effects on soil structure.…”

Section: Conclusion and Future Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Irrigation Water Quality and Soil Structural Stability: A Perspective with Some New Insights

Rengasamy¹

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sustainability of irrigated agriculture depends on the quality of irrigation water used. The electrolyte concentration (EC) of irrigation water may lead to the accumulation of salts in the root zone layers and affect the physiological functions of the crop by osmotic and ion toxicity effects. Further, the cationic and anionic composition of the water may alter the exchangeable cation composition of the soil and as well as its pH. Because of the dominance of sodium salts in many sources of irrigation water, parameters related to sodium such as exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP) of soils and sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) of soil solutions have been commonly used to study the effects of sodium in irrigation water on soil structural stability. Quirk and Schofield concept of ‘threshold electrolyte concentration’ (TEC) has shown the importance of electrolytes in preventing the effects of sodium on soil structure. Based on this concept, several models have been proposed to relate ESP or SAR with EC to predict the possible impacts of irrigation water on soil structural stability. However, many research reports indicate that this relationship varies with soils and a given model is not suitable for all types of soils. Further, the effects of potassium and magnesium in the processes leading to clay dispersion are disregarded in these models. This essay analyses all the factors involved in the structural failure of soils with different cationic composition, identify the defects in these TEC models and re-defines TEC on the basis of new insights on dispersive and flocculating charges of soils. This review does not deal with EC effects on crops and also the role of contaminant ions not involved with soil structural stability.

show abstract

“…In any case, the selection of soil quality indicators needs to be made by simultaneously considering the soil functions and/or the services associated with them that are to be evaluated, and the local conditions imposed by the soil-climatic characteristics at the site under consideration. Some examples of the use of this approach in Navarre, Spain [25,26] for the evaluation of soil quality in agrosystems managed according to conservation agriculture criteria showed that the most appropriate indicators can vary in a relatively short lapse of time with a change of context, such as the transformation from rainfed to irrigated. The identification of these indicators, therefore, must also consider the management context.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soil Quality Assessment after 25 Years of Sewage Sludge vs. Mineral Fertilization in a Calcareous Soil

Simões‐Mota

Poch

Enrique

et al. 2021

Land

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this work was to identify the most sensitive soil quality indicators and assess soil quality after long-term application of sewage sludge (SS) and conventional mineral fertilization for rainfed cereal production in a sub-humid Mediterranean calcareous soil. The treatments included six combinations of SS at different doses (40 t ha−1 and 80 ha−1) and frequencies (every 1, 2 and 4 years), plus a control with mineral fertilization, and a baseline control without fertilization. Twenty-five years after the onset of the experiment, 37 pre-selected physical, chemical and biological soil parameters were measured, and a minimum data set was determined. Among these indicators, those significantly affected by treatment and depth were selected as sensitive. A principal component analysis (PCA) was then performed for each studied depth. At 0–15 cm, PCA identified three factors (F1, F2 and F3), and at 15–30 cm, two factors (F4 and F5) that explained 71.5% and 67.4% of the variation, respectively, in the soil parameters. The most sensitive indicators (those with the highest correlation within each factor) were related to nutrients (P and N), organic matter, and trace metals (F1 and F4), microporosity (F2), earthworm activity (F3), and exchangeable cations (F5). Only F3 correlated significantly (and negatively) with yield. From these results, we concluded that soil quality can be affected in opposite directions by SS application, and that a holistic approach is needed to better assess soil functioning under SS fertilization in this type of agrosystem.

show abstract

Tillage Effects on Soil Quality after Three Years of Irrigation in Northern Spain

Cited by 20 publications

References 77 publications

Soil quality indices based on long‐term conservation cropping systems management

Soil quality indices based on long‐term conservation cropping systems management

Irrigation Water Quality and Soil Structural Stability: A Perspective with Some New Insights

Soil Quality Assessment after 25 Years of Sewage Sludge vs. Mineral Fertilization in a Calcareous Soil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About