No-till and conservation agriculture in the United States: An example from the David Brandt farm, Carroll, Ohio

Islam, Rafiq; Reeder, Randall

doi:10.1016/s2095-6339(15)30017-4

Cited by 54 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…CODE 340: COVER CROPS Cover crops (figure 3) protect the soil from erosion, improve soil tilth, and promote a healthy soil by increasing the number and species of beneficial microorganisms to compete with harmful species (Islam and Reeder 2014). Further, increased crop residue and soil C at the soil surface may increase soil infiltration and soil water holding capacity (Islam and Reeder 2014).…”

Section: Conservation Practice Standardmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, increased crop residue and soil C at the soil surface may increase soil infiltration and soil water holding capacity (Islam and Reeder 2014). As a result, cover crops have been shown to reduce NO 3 -N losses 13% to 94% (Strock et al 2004;Kaspar et al 2012).…”

Section: Conservation Practice Standardmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cover crops may be grown to increase C sequestration and to increase soil N and P nutrient retention in a stable organic form that is plant available. Cover crops protect the soil by reducing the erosive energy of water and wind, conserving soil resources, and protecting water resources (Hoorman 2008;Islam and Reeder 2014).…”

Section: Conservation Practice Standardmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An assessment of in-field nutrient best management practices for agricultural crop systems with subsurface drainage

Ward¹,

Sharpley²,

Miller³

et al. 2018

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Conservation Practice Standardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conservation Practice Standardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conservation Practice Standardmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An assessment of in-field nutrient best management practices for agricultural crop systems with subsurface drainage

Ward¹,

Sharpley²,

Miller³

et al. 2018

Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…During experiments with direct drilling in Ohio, retaining and in some cases increase of yields was noticed, compared to conventional tillage (Islam and Reeder, 2014). In Europe, during experiments in Hungary, yield increase of 10% was found, with the emergence of a lower decrease in yields in the first year of application of the concept of reduced tillage.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The reasons for this delay were found in the undeveloped specific machinery that would have allowed direct sowing, but also in prices of herbicides, which until 2000 were high, as Monsanto's patent for glyphosate expired that year. Also in this period, the price of diesel fuel started to rapidly increase (Islam and Reeder, 2014;Reicosky and Hanson, 2007;Epplin, 2007).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic effectiveness of direct drill in maize production

Zuza¹,

Markovic²

2017

Ratar i povrt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary:Within the concept of sustainable agriculture, raising environmental awareness of farmers and the preservation of natural resources, the implementation of the so-called conservation tillage began during the 1960s in the USA. It involves the application of a reduced or completely eliminated (no-till, zero tillage, direct drill) sowing tillage, which prevents soil erosion, improves soil quality and biodiversity, also significantly reducing gas emissions by implementing a set of technical solutions. The application of this concept requires the existence of appropriate machinery that enables the use of direct seeding on land where plant residues of previous crops are present in the amount of minimum 30%. In addition to significant environmental impacts, this concept provides positive economic effects: for the whole society by eliminating the cost caused by soil degradation, but also for individual agricultural producers through the elimination of a significant number of complex machining operations and savings in diesel fuel and working hours of machines and employees. A comparative analysis of the economic effectiveness of maize production in terms of conventional tillage and no-till on a farm in Novi Sad showed that the application of direct drill allows skipping 4 to 5 machining operations, leading to a saving of 59 litres of diesel fuel per hectare of cultivated area while retaining the same average yield per ha, which resulted in increased profits by 4,246 RSD ha -1 compared to conventional tillage. Key words: agricultural economics, cost-effectiveness, drilling, economic analysis, maize, zero tillage Conservation agriculture (CA) is defined in the context of the system of sustainable agricultural development, which includes agricultural practices adapted to the requirements of crops and local conditions, including tillage and land management techniques that ensure the protection of soil against erosion and degradation, improve its quality and allow biodiversity and conservation of natural resources, water and air, with yield optimization ("What is conservation agriculture ?", 2015).Agricultural practices applied within the CA concept are based on three main principles: 1. Minimum soil disturbance 2. Maintenance of permanent soil cover 3. Cropping system diversity, crop rotations ("What is conservation agriculture?", 2015).Corresponding author: todor.markovic@polj.edu.rs Acknowledgement: This study is part of the project III46006 titled "Sustainable agriculture and rural development in order to achieve strategic goals Republic of Serbia in the Danube region" and the project TR31011 titled "Effect of components quality in cyprinids feeding on meat quality, losses and economic efficiency" subsidized by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technological Development of the Republic of Serbia.

show abstract

Perspective comes with time: What do long‐term egg and juvenile indices say about Chesapeake Bay Striped Bass productivity?

Uphoff

2023

Mar Coast Fish

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThree hypotheses about poor recruitment and collapse of Striped Bass Morone saxatilis in Chesapeake Bay during the 1970s and 1980s (excessive larval mortality related to water quality, recruitment overfishing, or a combination) emerged from intense investigations during the mid‐1980s into the early 1990s. Stock collapse during the 1970s and 1980s and recovery in 1995 were largely attributed to fishing mortality and this premise largely drives management. Stock and larval habitat assessments were not available before the early 1980s and habitat assessments were discontinued after recovery. I used egg and juvenile index time‐series that extended back to 1955 to test these three hypotheses about changes in productivity.MethodsLong‐term (1955–2019) indices of recruitment (juvenile index [JI]), spawning dispersion in time and space (Ep, proportion of plankton net samples with eggs), and an index of relative larval survival (RLS = JI/Ep) for spawning areas in Maryland’s portion of Chesapeake Bay were used to investigate whether larval survival patterns were stable (supported the overfishing hypothesis) or changed (supported the larval mortality hypothesis).ResultBaywide Ep estimates were within similar higher ranges during 1957–1981 and 1989–2019, and were low enough to affect recruitment during 1982–1988. While there was a strong relationship of baywide Ep to spawning stock biomass (SSB) estimated by the stock assessment during recovery (1982–1995), estimates of Ep went from depleted to a high level earlier than SSB estimates. Estimates of postrecovery Ep and SSB were both high, but did not have a relationship. A decline in SSB that began in 2012 was not evident with Ep. A shift to low JIs in the early 1970s was followed by a decline in baywide Ep after 1979. Estimates of RLS were higher in 1960s, declined in the early to mid‐1970s, were mostly low into the early 1990s, and became higher afterward. Recovery of Ep after 1988 was accompanied by recovery of larval survival a few years later. Strong correlations of juvenile indices of Striped Bass, White Perch Morone americana, and Yellow Perch Perca flavescens further supported the larval survival hypothesis; these anadromous fish share larval nurseries in space and time, but have different life histories and fisheries that make simultaneous overfishing unlikely.ConclusionDeterioration of larval survival initiated the collapse of Chesapeake Bay Striped Bass and improvement contributed to recovery. The hypothesis that collapse and recovery was solely driven by fishing was not supported, but excessive fishing pressure lowered Ep and SSB and contributed to poor recruitment during 1982–1988. Long‐term climate patterns and warming, deterioration and improvement in acidic deposition, concurrent increases in freshwater salinization and alkalinization, and shifts in agriculture and watershed management indicated shifts in larval habitat suitability were plausible.

show abstract

No-till and conservation agriculture in the United States: An example from the David Brandt farm, Carroll, Ohio

Cited by 54 publications

References 10 publications

An assessment of in-field nutrient best management practices for agricultural crop systems with subsurface drainage

An assessment of in-field nutrient best management practices for agricultural crop systems with subsurface drainage

Economic effectiveness of direct drill in maize production

Perspective comes with time: What do long‐term egg and juvenile indices say about Chesapeake Bay Striped Bass productivity?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About