Potential of Species of Green Coverage in Entisol

Abstract

The intensive use of the soil, associated with the application of chemical fertilizers, contribute to degradation processes that affect soil quality and crop production. The use of techniques that contribute to soil conservation and reduction of external inputsis important for the success of the agriculture, and hedging is an alternative. The objective of this study was to evaluate the phytomass production nutrient accumulation and contents, as well as rate of decomposition of different species used as cover plants. The experimental design was randomized blocks, with nine treatments distributed in three blocks. The treatments were: Canavalia ensiformes (L.) DC., Crotalaria spectabilis Roth, Crotalaria ochroleuca G. Don., Crotalaria juncea L., Dolichos lablab L., Stizolobium niveum (Roxb.) Kuntze, Stizolobium aterrimum Piper & Tracy, Neonotonia wightii (Wight & Arn.) J.A. Lackey and Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R.Br. The most recommended species as cover plants are C. ochroleuca and C. spectabilis for they produce more dry matter on the tops, 5.89 and 4.04 kg ha-1, in addition to greater accumulation of nutrients. C. ochroleuca and C. spectabilis had higher accumulation of N, P, K, Mg and S, and soil coverage with those species can be a good source of green manure. The recommended species for the highest coverage rate are: N. wightii; S. niveum and S. aterrimum. The recommended species for the lowest rate of decomposition are: S. aterrimum; S. niveum; P. glaucum and C. ochroleuca (0.245; 0.260; 0.264 and 0.276% month-1).

Comparison of Methods for Estimating the Optimum Plot Size for Pearl Millet, Slender Leaf Rattlebox, and Showy Rattlebox

“…The differences between environments, pearl millet cultivars, rattlebox species, and the methodologies used to determine the plot size contributed to explaining the different results compared to those obtained in this study. Additionally, this plot size of 7.41 m 2 is smaller than those used in conventional studies of Debiasi et al (2016), Passos et al (2017, Sousa et al (2017), Ferreira et al (2019), Pfüller et al (2019), and Ascari et al (2020, as well as in studies with pearl millet, slender leaf rattlebox, and showy rattlebox, along with other soil cover species.…”

“…Soil cover species, such as pearl millet (Pennisetum glaucum L.), slender leaf rattlebox (Crotalaria ochroleuca), and showy rattlebox (Crotalaria spectabilis) have been studied regarding different aspects, such as the soil cover rate, decomposition rate, nutrient content, and phytomass production (PASSOS et al, 2017;FERREIRA et al, 2019;PFÜLLER et al, 2019). Also, the effects on soil chemical and physical properties (PASSOS et al, 2017;SOUSA et al, 2017;ASCARI et al, 2020), soybean nematodes (DEBIASI et al, 2016), hence soybean and corn productivity (DEBIASI et al, 2016;ASCARI et al, 2020) have been investigated.…”

“…These experiments were carried out in plots of 12 m 2 (PFÜLLER et al, 2019), 24 m 2 (FERREIRA et al, 2019), 25 m 2 (ASCARI et al, 2020), 50 m 2 (PASSOS et al, 2017), 60 m 2 (DEBIASI et al, 2016), and 150 m 2 (SOUSA et al, 2017). However, the criteria used to define the plot size were not mentioned.…”

Experimental dimensions and precision in trials with millet and slender leaf rattlebox

“…Soil cover species, such as millet (Pennisetum glaucum L . ) and slender leaf rattlebox (Crotalaria ochroleuca), have been studied in relation to soil cover rate, decomposition rate, nutrient content and phytomass production (FERREIRA et al, 2019;PASSOS et al, 2017;PFÜLLER et al, 2019;VUICIK et al, 2018). In addition, the effects on the chemical and physical properties of the soil (ASCARI et al, 2020;NASCENTE;STONE, 2018;PASSOS et al, 2017;SOUSA et al, 2017;VUICIK et al, 2018), nematodes in soybean (DEBIASI et al, 2016), invasive plants (VUICIK et al, 2018) and, consequently, on the grain yields of rice, soybean and corn (ASCARI et al, 2020;DEBIASI et al, 2016;NASCENTE, STONE, 2018), have been investigated.…”

“…These studies were conducted with three replicates and plots of 24 m 2 (FERREIRA et al, 2019), four replicates and plots of 12 m 2 ( P FÜLLER et al, 2019); 25 m 2 (ASCARI et al, 2020); 50 m 2 (PASSOS et al, 2017); 60 m 2 (DEBIASI et al, 2016); and 150 m 2 (SOUSA et al, 2017), five replicates and plots of 18 m 2 (VUICIK et al, 2018) and six replicates and plots of 168 m 2 (NASCENTE; STONE, 2018). In these studies, the criteria used to define the plot size and the number of replicates were not mentioned.…”