Upload
tactac-ras
View
236
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Conservation Tillage –Contribution of Roundup Ready
Systems
Dumitru – Ilie SandoiuUniversity of Agronomic Sciencesand Veterinary Medicine Bucharest
2
The resilience - a raport between restoration capacity and the degradation capacity
Lal (1995) proposed a funcţional relationship:
where:Sr is the soil resilienceSa – soil previous status before of antropical actionSv – forming time of new soilSd – intensity of soil degradationIm – inputs of agricultural management
Results that the soil is a renew resource as long as „Sv – Sd > 0”
Recovery time is questionable, for 2,5 cm soil deep from 30 years to 1000 years.
∫ ⋅+−+=f
i
t
t mdvar dtISSSS )(
3
Arable land surfaces suitable to conservative soil tillage systems in Roumania (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2008)
Total Flat land-low pitched Strongly-moderately sloping land
District
Thousands ha
% arable Thousands ha
% arable Thousands ha
% arable
Total România
4984 49,6 1567 15,61 3417 34,0
Minimum – Braşov
9 6,6 186 51,2 7 5,1
Maximum - Bacău
164 85,9 164 85,9
Constanţa 514 98,5 2 2,3 392 75,1
5
Historical evolution of farming tillage systems
Pimitive system of agricultureLying fallow farming systemFalow or field farming systemAlternate farming systemConventional farming systemIntensive farming systemAlternative farming systems (chiesel, paraplow)Unconventional farming systems (No-till, 0-till,Strip drill)
6
Ways and means in conservative tillage systems assumes
Conservative tillage systems quit plowingBetween them the tillage with chiesel, paraplow anddisk bring a strong mobilization of soil
The systems as “without works” or “directseeding” (No-till) provide most benefits for soilconservation
Essentialy a large quantity of plant debris remainat the soil surface
12
Criteria for the land suitability assessement at conservative tillage systems
For the flat and low sloping lands which are not subject to erosion:
1. Clay content, with values ranging from 13% to 32%
2. Slope gradient less than 5%
3. Excess moisture, from absent to more than moderate
4. Compaction or settling degree with values, 0% v/v (footer unsettling)
13
Criteria for the land suitability assessement at conservative tillage systems
For lands exposed to erosion processes, there are practically the same criteria but with different numerical values:
1. Clay content ranged between 13% and 45%
2. The slope gradient less than 15 – 18 %
3. The excess moisture, any
4. The compaction or settling degree, any
5. The salinity level from absent to more than moderate
14
The role of conventional and unconventional means in the tillage systems
The characteristics of the conventional tillage systems:
Depth work 20-30 cmTillage with owerthrow furrowLarge number of passes on the groundEasy mobile humus mineralizationDegradation of soil structure
15
The role of unconventional means in the tillage system
The characteristics of the unconventional tillage systems:Plow replacement with other active organ at chiesel, disc and seeder
Reducing of soil depth mobilization at 10-15 cm
Reducing of number of passes
Mulching of soil
Smoller decrease in the degree of mineralization of humus
Increasing of weed level at disk and chiesel
16
The role of means in no-tillage soil conservation with Roundup Ready system
Advantages: Increasing rate of accumulation of organic matter
Improving of hydrologic regime
Decrease of water loss through leakage and evaporation
Reducing of soil erosion losses
Modification of soil termic regime
Conservation of soil structure
Increase of soil macroporosity
Decrease of apparent density
Increasing rate of accumulation of microorganisms
17
The degree of soil surface with crop residue according to the method of loosening and pre-plant (Steiner et al., 1994, Sandoiu et al., 2010)
Tillage Fragile plants1 Unfragile plants2
Furrow plowing with returning
0 - 5 0- 10
Loosening by disk 5-15 10-20 Loosening by subsolier 60-80 70-90 Loosening by simply brush (chiesel)
40-60 60-80
Loosening by chiesel plow 30-40 50-70 Loosening by cultivation 35-50 60-70 Loosening by disk followed by smothing
30-50 50-70
Direct seeding 75-95 80-96 1) peas, beans, potatoes, soybean, sunflower, vegetables; 2) barley, wheat, oats, rice, maize, sorghum, cotton.
18
No-till system influence on water and soil loss (after Lal, 1997)
Runoff (mm)
Soil erosion (to/ha)
Soil Tillage duration years Plow till No-till Plow till No-till
Sandy loam 4 70 21 7 0,5 Loam 13 15 9 4 2,2 Silt loam 34 29 0 3 0 Clay loam 3 38 55 1 0,4 Clay 2 61 45 13 1,5
19
Soil physical characteristics
No-tilling farming impact on aggegate size and stability (after Blanco-Canqui, 2008)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
silt-loam silty clam loam loam
OHIO
Agg
rega
te m
ean
wei
ght
diam
eter
(mm
)
plow-tillageno-tillage
20
Soil physical characteristics
Crop residue influence on accumulated water quantity(after Blanca-Canqui, 2006)
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Crop residue (t/ha)
Wat
er c
onte
nt (v
/v)
21
Soil physical characteristics
Soil compactation in no-tillage soils (after Blanco-Canqui et al, 2007)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
loamy-sand silt-loam loam
INDIANA
Con
e in
dex(
MP
a)
plow-tillageno-tillage
22
Soil physical characteristics
Crop residue influence on soil temperature on winter (after Blanca-Canqui, 2006)
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
00 1 2 3 4 5 6
Crop residue (t/ha)
Soi
l tem
pera
ture
(C d
egre
es)
23
Soil physical characteristics
Crop residue influence on soil temperature on summer (after Blanca-Canqui, 2006)
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Crop residue (t/ha)
Soi
l tem
pera
ture
(C d
egre
es)
24
Soil physical characteristics
Total soil Porosity (% v/v) at differents tillage variants after 3 years in SCDA Valu lui Traian –Roumania (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2008)
The Depth (cm)
Conventionaltillage
Chisel Disk Direct Seeding
W5%
0-5 55 57 50 53 4 5-10 49 49 47 47 3 15-20 49 49 50 48 3 25-30 48 50 50 48 3 35-40 50 52 52 49 4
25
Soil physical characteristics
The tillage influence on loam soil structure (soil water stability, %) after 3 years in SCDA Valu lui Traian (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2007) The Depth (cm)
Conventional tillage
Chisel Disk Direct Seeding
W5%
0-5 4 3 4 4 1 5-10 5 5 4 5 1 15-20 6 4 6 5 1 25-30 7 8 15 11 2 35-40 10 13 17 13 3
26
Soil physical characteristics
The tillage influence on chernozem soil structure (soil water stability, %) after 3 years in SCDA Brăila (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2007) The Depth (cm)
Conventional tillage
Chisel Disk Direct Seeding
W5%
0-5 3 3 3 4 1 5-10 3 3 3 4 1 15-20 3 3 3 5 2 25-30 4 3 4 5 3 35-40 6 3 4 6 3
27
Agrochemical characteristics of soil at different tillage variants in SCDA Braila 2003/2004 (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2007)
Depth (cm)
Plow Chiesel Disk Direct seeding
W5%
Organic carbon (%) 0-5 1,63 1,63 1,62 1,67 0,14 5-10 1,54 1,55 1,51 1,57 0,13 15-20 1,51 1,52 1,52 1,52 0,14 Humus (%) 0-5 2,81 2,81 2,82 2,87 0,14 5-10 2,65 2,65 2,60 2,70 0,23 15-20 2,59 2,60 2,60 2,61 0,24 N total (%) 0-5 0,200 0,214 0,196 0,194 0,206 5-10 0,188 0,188 0,178 0,180 0,183 15-20 0,169 0,190 0,174 0,165 0,180
28
Agrochemical characteristics of soil at different tillage variants in SCDA Braila 2003/2004 (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2007)
Depth (cm)
Plow Chiesel Disk Direct seeding
W5%
P2O5 (mg/kg) 0-5 39 39 38 47 12 5-10 34 32 30 25 17 15-20 26 22 20 16 14 K2O (mg/kg) 0-5 269 325 286 296 21 5-10 240 274 224 237 31 15-20 211 262 167 230 42
29
Biological soil characteristics
Tillage influence on earthworm population (after Jordan et al., 1997)
020406080
100120140160180
Continoussoybean
Soybean-Corn Corn-Soybean Continous corn
Ear
thw
orm
cou
nt/s
qm
chisel + diskno - tillage
30
The influence of tillage (after maize) on vital parameter in cambic chernozem at INCDA-Fundulea (Gh. Stefanic, D. Sandoiu, 2010)
Variants Respiration CO2 mg/100 g dry soil
Cellulozolytic activity % degradated celulose
V1 - Plowing 20 cm a 14,63 a 7,06
V2 - Chiesel 20 cm b 12,64 a 10,74
V3 - Vibromixt 10-15 cm a 14,35 b 3,77
V4 – Strip-till a 18,55 a 8,31
V5 – Direct sowing a 23,27 b 6,50
DL P 5% 9,33 3,94
31
The influence of tillage (after corn) on pedoenzymaticalparameters to cambic chernozem in INCDA FUNDULEA (Gh. Stefanic, D. Sandoiu, 2010)
Variants Catalaze cmc O2 at 100 g soil dry mater
Zacharaze mg glucoză at 100 g soil dry mater
Ureaze mg NH4
+ at l00 g soil dry mater
Phosfatase mg P at l00 g soil dry mater
V1 - Plowing 20 cm a 398 b 2190 c 47,67 b 13,74
V2 - Chiesel 20 cm b 169 b 2586 a 73,04 b 13,12
V3 - Vibromixt 10-15 cm
b 192 b 2538 b 64,81 a 16,50
V4 – Strip-till b 144 a 2955 b 64,24 c 5,77
V5 – Direct sowing a 376 a 3259 a 76,31 a 18,02
DL P 5% = 105 5% = 501 1% = 9,72 5% = 6,19
32
The influence of basis tillage (after maize) evaluated by syntetics parameters (vital- IPAV, pedoenzinatical-IPAE and biological-ISB at ambic chernozem in INCDA-Fundulea (Gh.Stefanic, D. Sandoiu 2010)
Variants Indicator IPAV %
Indicator IPAE %
Indicatorul ISB %
V1 - Plowing 20 cm a 10,47 a 50,92 a 30,69
V2 - Chiesel 20 cm a 10,23 a 58,62 a 34,42
V3 - Vibromixt 10-15 cm
a 11,62 a 54,91 a 33,26
V4 – Strip-till a 12,39 a 58,85 a 35,62
V5 – Direct sowing a 11,31 a 54,71 a 34,01
DL P 5% = 4,05 5% = 12,77 1% = 6,63
33
CONCLUSIONS
No-till and RR systems are conservation tillage who requires no-till machines and RR package with seeds and herbicide;
No-till system as conservation tillage reduced water losses and soil erosion
Romania needs No-till system for 3,6 million ha
The influence on physical, chemical and biological properties is beneficial but good results appears after a longer research period
Spring sowing date should be delayed due to thermal inertia of covered soil with plant debris