Effect of Tillage and Rotation on Agronomic Performance of Corn and Soybean: Twenty-Year Study on Dark Silty Clay Loam Soil

Abstract

In the U.S. Corn Belt, tillage without plowing was used on more than 50% of corn (Zea mays L.) and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] acreage in 1994, while no‐till planting was used on about 30% of the acreage. Few research studies have evaluated these reduced tillage systems for 20 yr or more. This study includes plow, chisel, ridge, and no‐till systems in continuous corn, corn after soybean, soybean after corn, and continuous soybean rotations. The experiment was conducted on Chalmers (fine‐silty, mixed, mesic Typic Haplaquolls) silty clay loam soil in north‐central Indiana for 20 yr. Objectives were to determine the effect of tillage and rotation on stands, growth, maturity, and yield of corn and soybean and to determine trends that develop with time for these variables. Major stand reductions occurred only in no‐till continuous corn, 8% less than plowing. Compared with plowing, chisel and ridge tillage systems reduced growth and yield and increased harvest moisture by less than 3% in continuous corn. No‐till reduced 4‐wk height of continuous corn by 17%, yield by 14%, and increased harvest moisture by 2.1 percentage points compared with plowing. For corn following soybean, only no‐till corn showed a yield reduction, 2.8%, compared with plowing. Twenty‐year mean soybean yield reductions averaged 4 to 7% in both rotation and monoculture for chisel, ridge, and no‐till systems compared with plowing. Relative yields for no‐till continuous corn tended to be less than other tillage‐rotation systems over time, while no‐till soybean yields tended to improve with time, especially during the last 5 yr of the study. Both corn and soybean yields were better in rotation than in continuous cropping for all tillage systems. Of the tillage systems‐rotation combinations in this study, only no‐till continuous corn is likely to suffer major yield loss on a long‐term basis on dark prairie soils of the Central and Northern Corn Belt. Research Question The use of reduced (no‐plow) tillage systems has increased rapidly in the Midwest during the past 10 yr. Both residue on the soil surface and soil physical and chemical properties are altered with time when farmers change tillage system. These changes may affect crop growth and yield potential. There is a need to determine both long‐term average yields and long‐term trends with the reduced tillage system. Literature Summary Research throughout the Midwest has shown that well drained soil, light surface residue, more southern latitude, and delayed planting lead to greater success with reduced tillage. Most Midwestern tillage system studies were conducted for 10 yr or less. The study reported here includes a range in tillage systems, both continuous and rotational cropping, and has completed 20 yr. Objectives were: (i) to determine the effect of tillage and crop rotation on stands, growth, maturity, and yield of corn and soybean on silty clay loam soil, and (ii) to determine trends that develop in the above variables with time. Study Description The research was conducted in west‐centra...

Pre‐Plant Anhydrous Ammonia Placement Consequences on No‐Till Versus Conventional‐Till Maize Growth and Nitrogen Responses

“…Higher maize GY A in conventional tillage than in no-till was previously reported for Indiana by Barber (1971), Mengel et al (1982), West et al (1996), and Boomsma et al (2010), and for other Corn Belt states by Fink and Wesley (1974), Huggins and Pan (1993), Vetsch andRandall (2004), andBos (2012). Proportional differences between tillage systems and N rates were smaller in 2011 and 2012 relative to 2010, presumably as a result of plant growth/grain fill limitations from the hailstorm damage in 2011, and drought stress in 2012 (Eck, 1984;Bennett et al, 1989).…”

“…Despite the large differences in GY A between the tillage systems and N rates, GY A at the lower N rate with parallel NH 3 placement did not differ from GY A attained with the higher N rate with diagonal NH 3 placement; neither did GY A with parallel application in the no-till tillage system differ significantly from GY A attained in conventional tillage with diagonal application. The lower N rate lowered GY A by 0.8 and 1.2 Mg ha -1 in conventional till and no-till systems, respectively, within the tillage system × N rate interaction; however GY A for the 145 kg N ha -1 in conventional tillage did not differ significantly from that of the no-till at 202 kg N ha -1 (data not shown).Higher maize GY A in conventional tillage than in no-till was previously reported for Indiana by Barber (1971), Mengel et al (1982, West et al (1996), andBoomsma et al (2010), and for other Corn Belt states by Fink and Wesley (1974), Huggins and Pan (1993), Vetsch andRandall (2004), andBos (2012). Proportional differences between tillage systems and N rates were smaller in 2011 and 2012 relative to 2010, presumably as a result of plant growth/grain fill limitations from the hailstorm damage in 2011, and drought stress in 2012 (Eck, 1984;Bennett et al, 1989).…”

The Effect of Various Long-Term Tillage Systems on Yield and Yield Component of Yellow and Narrow-Leaved Lupin

“…The results differ depending on the type of crop, soil and weather patterns (Borin and Sartori, 1995). West et al (1996) observed poor yielding of soybean under NT when compared with other tillage systems in a corn-soybean rotation during some drought years. In turn, Heenan et al (2000) showed that the mean annual seed yields of lupin ranged from 0.26 to 3.15 t ha -1 in years and differences in lupin seed yields between tillage (conventional cultivation and direct drilling) and stubble treatments over time were marginal.…”

How Eco-Efficient Are Low-Input Cropping Systems in Western Europe, and What Can Be Done to Improve Their Eco-Efficiency?

“…Numerous experiments have shown that soybean yields are increased when this crop is grown in rotation with non-leguminous crops [62][63][64][65][66]. Changing from soybean to another crop breaks the lifecycle of soybean cyst nematodes (SCN's).…”