Cover crops can affect subsequent wheat yield in the Central Great Plains

Nielsen, D. G.; Vigil, Merle F.; Lyon, Drew J.; Higgins, Robert K.; Hergert, Gary W.; Holman, Johnathon D.

doi:10.2134/cs2016.49.0315

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The 126-d samples were taken after the seeding of cover crops. Similar results were observed on the previous study, which showed that cover crops reduced SWS compared with no cover crop treatment (Gabriel et al, 2012;Nielsen et al, 2016). Another reason could be due to enough precipitation occur in the month of September.…”

Section: Infiltration Ratesupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Similar results were observed in another study conducted in Iowa where long-term (>14 yr) use of winter rye CC increased soil water storage (Basche et al, 2016b). Several previous studies showed that cover crops can reduce water availability for next crops in semiarid and water limited areas (Nielsen et al, 2015;Nielsen et al, 2016). However, another study conducted in Iowa showed that winter cover crops increased SWS during the drought of 2012 (Daigh et al, 2014).…”

Section: Infiltration Ratesupporting

confidence: 80%

“…Improved soil water management practices can reduce evaporation and runoff, which has positive impact on crop production (Jägermeyr et al, 2016). In some cases, cover crops have been shown to reduce water availability for the following cash crop reducing crop yield (Nielsen et al, 2016;Unger and Vigil, 1998). Conversely, many researchers have shown that the residue left after termination of cover crops helps to store more water in the soil profile (Alliaume et al, 2014;Basche et al, 2016b).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cover Crops and Returning Residue Impact on Soil Organic Carbon, Bulk Density, Penetration Resistance, Water Retention, Infiltration, and Soybean Yield

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Johnson et al., 2016). Removal of crop residue reduces soil organic carbon (SOC), and impacts soil productivity. However, the impacts of residue removal rates on soils depend on certain factors such as soil texture, soil topography, initial contents of SOC, tillage, and cropping system (Blanco-Canqui et al., 2013). Water is the most limiting factor for crop production in regions where either irrigation is not available or precipitation is limited (Das et al., 2017). Water stored in the soil profile helps to fulfill the water requirement for following crop in the rotation. Corn residue left behind after corn harvest helps to conserve water in soil (Iqbal et al., 2013) and plays an important role in water conservation and hence increase grain yields where irrigation or precipitation is a limiting factor in crop production (Van Donk et al., 2010; VanLoocke et al., 2012). The long-term adoption of CC could negate the adverse effects of residue removal and increase SOC and improve soil water dynamics, eventually improving crop production and soil productivity (Basche et al., 2016a; Basche et al., 2016b; Kahimba et al., 2008). A study by Chahal and Van Eerd (2018) showed that cover crop increased SOC concentrations by 8.4 to 9.3% and crop yield by 7.9 to 22% compared with no cover crop treatment. Basche and DeLonge (2017) showed that adoption of CC for more than 10 yr improved soil hydrological properties

show abstract

Section: Infiltration Ratesupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Infiltration Ratesupporting

confidence: 80%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cover Crops and Returning Residue Impact on Soil Organic Carbon, Bulk Density, Penetration Resistance, Water Retention, Infiltration, and Soybean Yield

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although not significant in Ds/Do, residues of cereal rye, as well as corn from the previous year, could help in the reduction of evapotranspiration from surface soil, indicating a potential increase in bio-pores [51,58]. Similar results were reported by Nielson et al [59] and Basche et al [60] that cover crops can reduce water availability for the next crops in water-limiting conditions. Figure 3b shows that the inclusion of a cereal rye and no tillage increased Ds/Do at 10-20 cm depth compared to other treatment combinations.…”

Section: Effects Of Tillage System Cover Crop and Crop Rotation On Relative Gas Diffusion Coefficientsupporting

confidence: 73%

No Tillage Improved Soil Pore Space Indices under Cover Crop and Crop Rotation

Panday

Nkongolo

2021

Soil Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Assessment of the effects of crop management practices on soil physical properties is largely limited to soil moisture content, air content or bulk density, which can take considerable time to change. However, soil pore space indices evolve rapidly and could quickly detect changes in soil properties resulting from crop management practices, but they are not often measured. The objective of this study was to investigate how soil pore space indices—relative gas diffusion coefficient (Ds/Do) and pore tortuosity factor (τ)—are affected by tillage system (TL), cover crop (CC) and crop rotation (CR). A study was conducted on silt loam soil at Freeman farm, Lincoln University of Missouri during the 2011 to 2013 growing seasons. The experiment design was a randomized complete block with two tillage systems (no tillage or no-till vs conventional tillage), two cover crops (no rye vs cereal rye (Secale cereale L.)) and four crop rotations (continuous corn (Zea mays L.), continuous soybean (Glycine max L.), corn–soybean and soybean–corn successions). All the treatments were replicated three times for a total of 48 experimental units. Soils were collected from two sampling depths (SD), 0–10 and 10–20 cm, in each treatment and soil physical properties, including bulk density (BD), air-filled porosity (AFP, fa) and total pore space (TPS, Φ), were calculated. Gas diffusivity models following AFP and/or TPS were used to predict Ds/Do and τ values. Results showed that, overall, Ds/Do was significantly increased in no-tilled plots planted to cereal rye in 2012 (p = 0.001) and in 2013 (p = 0.05). No-tilled continuous corn, followed by continuous soybean and no-tilled soybean–corn rotations had the highest Ds/Do values, respectively. In magnitude, Ds/Do was also increased in no-till plots at the lower depth (10–20 cm). No-tilled plots planted with cereal rye significantly reduced τ in 2012 (p = 0.001) and in 2013 (p = 0.05). Finally, at the upper depth (0–10 cm), the no-tilled corn–soybean rotation and the tilled soybean–corn rotation had the lowest τ. However, at the lower depth (10–20 cm), the four crop rotations were not significantly different in their τ values. These results can be useful to quickly assess the changes in soil physical properties because of crop management practices and make necessary changes to enhance agricultural resilience.

show abstract

“…In this review, we focused specifically on water retained at field capacity and permanent wilting point and not on actual field water content. Available studies reporting actual field water content generally indicate that CCs can reduce water for the next crop in semiarid regions (Holman et al., 2018; Meyer, Bergez, Constantin, & Belleville, 2020; Nielsen, Lyon, Hergert, Higgins, & Homan, 2015, 2016; Unger & Vigil, 1998), whereas in regions with high precipitation CCs do not generally reduce water required for the subsequent crop. Indeed, in regions with high precipitation, the use of water by CCs can be beneficial to reduce excess soil water (Blanco‐Canqui et al., 2011; Kahimba, Ranjan, Froese, Entz, & Nason, 2008).…”

Section: Do Cover Crops Enhance the Ability Of The Soil To Retain Water?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cover crop impacts on soil physical properties: A review

Blanco‐Canqui

Ruis

2020

Soil Science Soc of Amer J

191

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cover crop (CC) impacts on soil ecosystem services including erosion control, C sequestration, soil productivity, and others have been reviewed. However, CC impacts on soil physical properties, which affect the soil's ability to perform a variety of soil ecosystem services, have not been synthesized. We reviewed 98 peer-reviewed publications up to 10 June 2020 on CCs and soil physical properties. Our review indicates that, in most studies, CCs reduce soil penetration resistance or compaction by 0-29% (average, 5%). They improve wet aggregate stability by 0-95% (average, 16%) and cumulative infiltration by 0-190% (average, 43%) but have negligible impacts on bulk density, dry aggregate stability, saturated hydraulic conductivity (K sat), unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (K unsat), volumetric water content at −10 to −33 kPa matric potential (field capacity), and plant available water. Soils under CCs can be cooler in daytime and warmer at nighttime, and warmer in winter and cooler in the rest of year. Volumetric heat capacity increases and thermal diffusivity decreases, indicating that CCs could moderate heat transport rate. Soil texture, tillage system, CC-derived soil C concentration, and CC duration affect CC impacts on physical properties. For example, the positive impacts from CCs can increase as CC management duration increases and combining CCs with no-till can improve water infiltration more than with tilled soils. Long-term data on hydraulic properties, thermal properties, dry aggregate stability, and pore-size distribution are scant. In general, CCs improve most soil physical properties, but the magnitude of improvement is highly site-and management specific.

show abstract

Cover crops can affect subsequent wheat yield in the Central Great Plains

Cited by 8 publications

References 4 publications

Cover Crops and Returning Residue Impact on Soil Organic Carbon, Bulk Density, Penetration Resistance, Water Retention, Infiltration, and Soybean Yield

Cover Crops and Returning Residue Impact on Soil Organic Carbon, Bulk Density, Penetration Resistance, Water Retention, Infiltration, and Soybean Yield

No Tillage Improved Soil Pore Space Indices under Cover Crop and Crop Rotation

Cover crop impacts on soil physical properties: A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About