The 4Rs for cover crops and other advances in cover crop management for environmental quality

Delgado, Jorge A.; Gantzer, Clark J.

doi:10.2489/jswc.70.6.142a

Cited by 37 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We expected slower adoption of CCs in drier areas and a slower adoption rate of no-till practices in humid and colder areas. Given CC water usage, water availability for the following cash crop could be an issue in drier areas (Delgado & Gantzer, 2015). On the other hand, no-till practices perform better in drier and warmer areas (Ogle, Swan, & Paustian, 2012).…”

Section: Definition Of Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We also found that when precipitation is above the average levels, farmers are more likely to adopt CCs in subsequent years. Water availability for a cash crop after a CC or fields with heavy residue on the soil surface (which can occur in CNT systems) could be a concern for growers (Delgado & Gantzer, 2015), making it plausible that farmers are more apprehensive to adopt CCs in drier years.…”

Section: External Market Factors and Weather Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Conservation practice complementarity and timing of on‐farm adoption

Canales

Bergtold

Williams

2020

Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adoption of conservation practices is a dynamic process. Factors that vary over time can affect farmers’ decision to adopt and adoption timing. We used a duration model to evaluate the farmer's adoption time for continuous no‐till (CNT), cover crops (CCs), and the variable‐rate application of inputs (VRA). We found that producers who had previously adopted soil conservation practices were more likely to adopt additional complementary practices. Farmers using crop rotation adopted CNT and CCs approximately 48% and 62% faster than farmers without a crop rotation, respectively. The CC adoption time was also reduced by 70% for farmers who had adopted CNT. Complementarities between conservation practices may enhance the benefits from adoption and allow farmers to adopt bundles of conservation practices more quickly over time. This can be taken advantage of in conservation programs by promoting or requiring practices first that enhance adoption of other practices. We also found important heterogeneity in the adoption speed associated with farm management characteristics, producers’ attitudes, weather patterns, and crop prices.

show abstract

Section: Definition Of Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: External Market Factors and Weather Variablesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conservation practice complementarity and timing of on‐farm adoption

Canales

Bergtold

Williams

2020

Agricultural Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Cover crops play an important role in improving the physical, chemical, and biological properties of soil [5,6]. This includes improving soil organic matter content and characteristics, and thus overall soil quality [7], as well as reducing greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural ecosystems by enhancing C sequestration [8,9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cover Crop Influence on Soil Enzymes and Selected Chemical Parameters for a Claypan Corn–Soybean Rotation

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cover crops (CC) improve soil quality, including soil microbial enzymatic activities and soil chemical parameters. Scientific studies conducted in research centers have shown positive effects of CC on soil enzymatic activities; however, studies conducted in farmer fields are lacking in the literature. The objective of this study was to quantify CC effects on soil microbial enzymatic activities (β-glucosidase, β-glucosaminidase, fluorescein diacetate hydrolase, and dehydrogenase) under a corn (Zea mays L.)–soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) rotation. The study was conducted in 2016 and 2018 in Chariton County, Missouri, where CC were first established in 2012. All tested soil enzyme levels were significantly different between 2016 and 2018, irrespective of CC and no cover crop (NCC) treatments. In CC treatment, β-glucosaminidase activity was significantly greater at 0–10 cm depth in 2016 and at 10–20 and 20–30 cm in 2018. In contrast, dehydrogenase activity was significantly greater in NCC in 2018. Soil pH and organic matter (OM) content were found to be significantly greater in CC. Overall, CC have mixed effects on soil enzyme activities and positive effects on soil OM compared to NCC. This study highlights the short-term influence of CC and illustrates the high spatial and temporal variability of soil enzymes under farmer-managed fields.

show abstract

“…The cover crops are planted mostly to protect and conserve the soil between cash crops [10]. The resulting ground cover conserves the soil by reducing erosion, and improves soil quality by providing organic matter and biological activity, reduces the amount of pollution entering water bodies, and controls harmful insects [11,12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Farmers are interested in the benefits of cover crops, but, so far, their adoption of the practice has been limited in Missouri and many other states [11,19]. A survey of 3500 farmers in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, and Minnesota was conducted in 2006, and its result indicated that only 18% of the farmers had used cover crops before and 11% had planted cover crops sometime in the preceding five years [20].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Impacts of Cover Crops for a Missouri Wheat–Corn–Soybean Rotation

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the United States, agricultural production using row-crop farming has reduced crop diversity. Repeated growing of the same crop in a field reduces soil productivity and increases pests, disease infestations, and weed growth. These negative effects can be mitigated by rotating cash crops with cover crops. Cover crops can improve soil’s physical, chemical, and biological properties, provide ground cover, and sequester soil carbon. This study examines the economic profitability for a four-year wheat–corn–soybean study with cover crops by conducting a field experiment involving a control (without cover crops) at the Soil Health Farm in Chariton County, MO, USA. Our findings suggested that economic profitability of the cash crop is negatively affected by the cover crop during the first two years but were positive in the fourth year. The rotation with cover crops obtained the same profit as in the control group if revenue from the cash crop increased by 35% or the cost of the cover crop decreased by 26% in the first year, depending on the cost of seeding the cover crop and terminating it. This study provides insights for policymakers on ways to improve the economic efficiency of cost-share conservation programs.

show abstract

The 4Rs for cover crops and other advances in cover crop management for environmental quality

Cited by 37 publications

References 31 publications

Conservation practice complementarity and timing of on‐farm adoption

Conservation practice complementarity and timing of on‐farm adoption

Cover Crop Influence on Soil Enzymes and Selected Chemical Parameters for a Claypan Corn–Soybean Rotation

Economic Impacts of Cover Crops for a Missouri Wheat–Corn–Soybean Rotation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About