Science‐based maize stover removal can be sustainable

Nunes, Márcio Renato; De, Mriganka; McDaniel, Marshall D.; Kovar, John L.; Birrell, Stuart J.; Karlen, Douglas L.

doi:10.1002/agj2.20724

Cited by 7 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…N management scenarios included two fertilization strategies, in the early spring or pod development stage ( Mourtzinis et al, 2018 ), and a high/low initial soil inorganic N to reflect different amounts of leftover N from the previous maize crop, within the ranges reported by Martinez-Feria et al (2019) . Residue management scenarios included alterations in the residue amount ( Nunes et al, 2021 ) and CN ratio ( Burgess et al, 2011 ). We also considered a scenario with a full tillage event before sowing ( Daigh et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate Change and Management Impacts on Soybean N Fixation, Soil N Mineralization, N2O Emissions, and Seed Yield

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Limited knowledge about how nitrogen (N) dynamics are affected by climate change, weather variability, and crop management is a major barrier to improving the productivity and environmental performance of soybean-based cropping systems. To fill this knowledge gap, we created a systems understanding of agroecosystem N dynamics and quantified the impact of controllable (management) and uncontrollable (weather, climate) factors on N fluxes and soybean yields. We performed a simulation experiment across 10 soybean production environments in the United States using the Agricultural Production Systems sIMulator (APSIM) model and future climate projections from five global circulation models. Climate change (2020–2080) increased N mineralization (24%) and N2O emissions (19%) but decreased N fixation (32%), seed N (20%), and yields (19%). Soil and crop management practices altered N fluxes at a similar magnitude as climate change but in many different directions, revealing opportunities to improve soybean systems’ performance. Among many practices explored, we identified two solutions with great potential: improved residue management (short-term) and water management (long-term). Inter-annual weather variability and management practices affected soybean yield less than N fluxes, which creates opportunities to manage N fluxes without compromising yields, especially in regions with adequate to excess soil moisture. This work provides actionable results (tradeoffs, synergies, directions) to inform decision-making for adapting crop management in a changing climate to improve soybean production systems.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate Change and Management Impacts on Soybean N Fixation, Soil N Mineralization, N2O Emissions, and Seed Yield

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several other recent Iowa studies in continuous corn have also reported grain yield increases with stover harvest. For instance, Nunes et al (2021) reported an average 4.5% increase in grain yield over 13 years with moderate stover removal rates, but no yield impacts at high stover removal rates Possible reasons for the yield increases sometimes observed with stover removal include darker soils that speed soil warming and corn phenological development in the spring (Sindelar et al, 2013), and greater levels of plantavailable nitrogen due to less immobilization by crop residues (Pantoja et al, 2015).…”

Section: Stover-harvest Compaction Was Minimal With No Grain Yield Im...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nunes et al (2021) recommended planning stover harvest based on expected yields: for tilled fields without cover crops, they recommended harvesting stover only when grain yields exceed 12 Mg ha −1 , with stover removal not to exceed 25%-40% of aboveground biomass. Nunes et al (2021) further recommended grain yields average a critical value of 11 Mg ha −1 for systems with implementation of soil health practices, including no-till, extended crop rotations, or cover crops. These recommendations were based principally on concerns for avoiding soil erosion and nutrient losses.…”

Section: Implementing No-till Following Stover Harvestmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Evaluations of corn stover removal impact over the last two decades suggest that moderate levels of stover removal can be tolerated in some locations without adverse effects on soil physical health indicators (Blanco‐Canqui & Lal, 2009; Nunes et al., 2021). However, where adverse outcomes have occurred, they have included increased bulk density (Blanco‐Canqui & Lal, 2007; Blanco‐Canqui et al., 2006; Chalise et al., 2019), soil crusting (Blanco‐Canqui et al., 2006), increased risk of erosion (Blanco‐Canqui & Lal, 2009; Johnson et al., 2016), and decreased soil organic matter content (Laird & Chang, 2013; Xu et al., 2019), which can help to prevent compaction (Thomas et al., 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Thirteen‐year stover harvest and tillage effects on soil compaction in Iowa

Phillips¹,

Tekeste

Ebrahimi

et al. 2023

Agrosystems Geosci & Env

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corn (Zea mays L.) stover is an abundant biomass source with multiple end‐uses including cellulosic biofuel production. However, stover removal may increase soil compaction by reducing organic matter inputs and increasing vehicle loads during harvest. While numerous studies have reported stover removal impacts on soil physical quality, few have assessed the role played by traffic compaction. Our objective was to quantify subsurface soil compaction after 13 years of chisel plow versus no‐till management and no, moderate (3.5 ± 1.1 Mg ha−1 year−1), or high (5.0 ± 1.7 Mg ha−1 year−1) stover harvest rates. Penetration resistance was measured in most‐ and least‐trafficked interrow spaces. Chisel plowed plots with moderate and high levels of stover removal had higher penetration resistance in trafficked areas relative to least‐trafficked areas, whereas there was no evidence of traffic compaction when stover was retained. Traffic compaction did not negatively impact yields, which were greater with high levels of stover removal compared to no removal. The no‐till practice led to very small increases in penetration resistance with wheel traffic and had no evidence of increased compaction with residue removal. This lack of traffic compaction indicated soils under no‐till practice have a higher load‐bearing capacity than soils under chisel plow practice. Overall, there were no yield‐limiting effects of tillage practice or stover removal, and no evidence of soil compaction below the plow layer, suggesting stover removal with both tillage practices can be effectively employed without detrimental effects on plant or soil health.

show abstract

“…However, successful ICLS design is constrained by limited information on belowground competitive and complementary interactions among species (Jose et al., 2006). In particular, root growth can improve soil health by altering the soil structure (Nunes et al., 2021), and thus quantitative data on the interactions of root systems in ICLS would help reveal when and how competition for resources occurs among the fine roots of different species and the aboveground effect of these interactions (Sarto et al., 2020a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maize and sorghum root growth and yield when intercropped with forage grasses

Sarto

Borges²,

Bassegio

et al. 2021

Agronomy Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Integrated crop–livestock systems that intercrop forage crops with grain crops are effective for increasing forage production and improving nutrient cycling and soil health. However, the potential for root competition when maize (Zea mays L.) and sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench] are intercropped with forages in sandy soils is unknown. The objectives of this study were (a) to evaluate the root growth and production characteristics of maize and sorghum intercropped with forage grasses and (b) quantify above‐ and belowground biomass in a tropical integrated cropping system. Two 3‐yr experiments were conducted in which maize and sorghum were intercropped with forage grasses: guineagrass (Panicum maximum Jacq.), ruzigrass [Urochloa ruziziensis (Germ. & Evrard) Crins], palisade grass [Urochloa brizantha (Hochst ex A. Rich.) R. Webster], or an Urochloa hybrid. Monocropped maize and sorghum were used as controls. Fine roots (≤3 mm) were sampled in the monocropped and intercropped systems at soil depths of 1.0 m. Intercropping guineagrass and palisade grass with maize and sorghum resulted in 40% greater dry matter production than intercropping with ruzigrass and the Urochloa hybrid. The positive effect of intercropping forage grasses in the low‐fertility sandy soil was greater for sorghum than for maize because of lower root growth competition. On average, intercropping maize and sorghum with forages increased the total above‐ and belowground biomass by 30 and 50%, respectively, compared with monocropping. In summary, intercropping maize and sorghum with forage grasses is a viable option to enhance biomass during the off‐season in tropical integrated crop–livestock systems.

show abstract

Science‐based maize stover removal can be sustainable

Cited by 7 publications

References 57 publications

Climate Change and Management Impacts on Soybean N Fixation, Soil N Mineralization, N2O Emissions, and Seed Yield

Climate Change and Management Impacts on Soybean N Fixation, Soil N Mineralization, N2O Emissions, and Seed Yield

Thirteen‐year stover harvest and tillage effects on soil compaction in Iowa

Maize and sorghum root growth and yield when intercropped with forage grasses

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About