Soybean‐Wheat Doublecropping: Implications from Straw Management and Supplemental Nitrogen'¹

Abstract

Doublecropped soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) following winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is usually planted past the optimum date for monocropped beans. To make good yield, early growth of doublecropped soybean is very important. The purpose of this experiment was to determine wheat straw leachate, wheat straw management, and supplemental N effects on soybean germination, growth, and yield. Leachate concentrations of 0, 20, and 100 g L -1 (straw to deionized water) were used for germination and radicle growth studies. Leachate concentrations of 0, 2, and 20 g L -1 were used in sand culture and the Ap horizon of Okolona silty clay (fine, montorillonitic, thermic Typic Chromudert) to study germination and early growth of soybean. A 3-yr experiment on Okolona silty clay, consisting of six management practices and two N levels (0 and 28 kg ha-1 ), was used to study soybean growth and yield in the field. Management practices consisted of monocropped soybean planted near the optimum date and at the doublecropped date and doublecropped soybean planted where wheat straw was either burned, physically removed, soil-incorporated, or left standing. Germination was not significantly affected by leachate but was reduced by late planting in the field. The 100 g L -1 leachate inhibited radicle growth, while 20 g initially inhibited but then stimulated radicle growth. The 20 g L -1 leachate inhibited early growth in the laboratory but only in the silty clay, while the 2 g L -1 leachate stimulated growth, especially in the sand. Wheat straw inhibited growth and yield in the field. Supplemental N was most effective in overcoming depressed growth and yield where straw was left on the soil surface. Early monocropped soybean produced the largest average yield, but doublecropped soybean where straw was burned produced the greatest economic returns.

Winter wheat straw management on subsequent processing tomato yield, quality, economics and nitrogen dynamics

“…Despite immobilization in the spring with straw retained compared with removed treatments, Soon and Arshad (2004) observed no effect on crop yield or N uptake. Previous research attributed the interaction of straw management and N fertilizer on crop yield to immobilization (Hairston et al 1987;Malhi et al 1989;Malhi and Nyborg 1990). However, our research showed no straw management by N fertilizer interaction except in-season.…”

“…Similar to results at Ridgetown, straw retention was found to result in higher subsequent crop yields compared with straw removal (Bakht et al 2009;Singh et al 2009). But in other studies straw retention resulted in lower yields (Hairston et al 1987;Opoku et al 1997;Vyn et al 1998). Similar to the lack of processing tomato yield response to wheat straw management at Leamington, yield of potato (Zebarth et al 2009), sugarbeet sugar (Allison et al 1992), and other crops (Soon and Arshad 2004;Malhi et al 2006) were not impacted by cereal straw retention or removal.…”

“…These studies compared straw management in the context of no-till vs. conventional tillage practices and have focused primarily on the effects on yield and to a lesser extent soil quality and N uptake, rather than on crop quality and economic return. Hairston et al (1987) found that net returns for soybeans were lower in wheat straw retention treatments when no N fertilizer was applied but there were little differences between straw management treatments in net returns with N applied. In contrast, although yields may be higher when wheat straw is left in the field, Stumborg et al (1996) suggested that removing straw may increase profit margins if straw revenues outweigh the costs of straw removal.…”

“…The effects of straw management practices have been assessed on a variety of other crops, including potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) (Zebarth et al 2009), barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) (Malhi and Nyborg, 1990;Nyborg et al 1995), wheat (Limon-Ortega et al 2000;Bakht et al 2009;Singh et al 2009), corn (Zea mays L.) (Opoku et al 1997), and soybeans (Glycine max L.) (Hairston et al 1987;Vyn et al 1998). These studies compared straw management in the context of no-till vs. conventional tillage practices and have focused primarily on the effects on yield and to a lesser extent soil quality and N uptake, rather than on crop quality and economic return.…”

Effect of Cropping System and Application of Cattle Slurry on Forage Production and Environmental Pollution in Paddy Land

“…우분액비 시용으로 총체 벼와 총체 영양보리 5) DWBRC: Double-cropping whole crop barley followed by whole crop rice applied with cattle slurry, 6) DSSC: Double-cropping whole crop barley followed by Sorghum-Sudangrass hybrid applied with cattle slurry, 7) WCR: whole crop rice, …”