Tillage alters the soil environment and microbial communities responsible for decomposition and nutrient cycling. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of tillage intensity (minimum vs. conventional) on the soil chemical and microbial properties of a winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)–fallow rotation in the low‐precipitation zone of the Pacific Northwest. Soils collected for 2 yr at two depths from both crop phases (wheat and fallow) were analyzed for pH, nutrient availability, total C and N, fungal and bacterial gene abundance, and enzyme activity related to C, P, and N cycling. All soil variables excluding soil pH were significantly greater in the top 10 cm of the soil. Except for pH and nitrate, all were greater in 2016 than in 2017. Across the full rotation, tillage did not affect any measured parameter. Instead, crop phase influenced several soil chemical properties and arylamidase activity, although the effects were not consistent across depth. Fungal abundance was influenced by tillage intensity but only in the top depth under wheat, indicating a phase‐specific effect rather than a change persisting across the entire rotation. Soil enzymes were strongly related to total C, total N, and phosphate across the two soil depths, but effects were inconsistent between depths and across phases. Overall, crop phase and year were stronger drivers of soil chemical and microbial properties than tillage intensity. Short‐term (<4 yr) tillage intensification does not have a strong influence on the nutrient cycling capacity of soil, although fungal numbers may decline in the cropped phase.
Core Ideas
Tillage intensification did not induce strong changes in soil properties.
Sample year and depth were significant factors impacting soil chemistry and biology.
Wheat‐cropped soil had more fungal DNA under minimum than conventional tillage.
Impacts of tillage were minor and limited to comparisons within each crop phase.
Zymoseptoria tritici is the causal agent of septoria tritici blotch (STB), a disease of wheat (Triticum aestivum) that results in significant yield loss worldwide. Z. tritici’s life cycle, reproductive system, effective population size, and gene flow put it at high likelihood of developing fungicide resistance. Succinate dehydrogenase inhibitor (SDHI) fungicides (FRAC code 7) were not widely used to control STB in the Willamette Valley until 2016. Field isolates of Z. tritici collected in the Willamette Valley at dates spanning the introduction of SDHI (2015-2017) were screened for sensitivity to four SDHI active ingredients: benzovindiflupyr, penthiopyrad, fluxapyroxad, and fluindapyr. Fungicide sensitivity changes were determined by EC50 values, or the fungicide concentration at which fungal growth is decreased by 50%. The benzovidiflupyr EC50 values increased significantly, indicating a reduction in sensitivity, following the adoption of SDHI fungicides in Oregon (p < 0.0001). Additionally, significant reduction in cross-sensitivity among SDHI active ingredients was also observed with a moderate and significant relationship between penthiopyrad and benzovindiflupyr (p = 0.0002), and a weak relationship between penthiopyrad and fluxapyroxad (p = 0.0482). No change in cross-sensitivity was observed with fluindapyr, which has not yet been labeled in the region. The results document a decrease in SDHI sensitivity in Z. tritici isolates following the introduction of the active ingredients to the Willamette Valley. The reduction in cross-sensitivity observed between SDHI active ingredients highlights the notion that careful consideration is required to manage fungicide resistance and suggests that within-group rotation is insufficient for resistance management.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.