Study

Effects of soil management practices and irrigation on plant water relations and productivity of chestnut stands under Mediterranean conditions

  • Published source details Martins A., Raimundo F., Borges O., Linhares I., Sousa V., Coutinho J.P., Gomes-Laranjo J. & Madeira M. (2010) Effects of soil management practices and irrigation on plant water relations and productivity of chestnut stands under Mediterranean conditions. Plant and Soil, 327, 57-70

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Crop production: Plant or maintain ground cover in orchards or vineyards

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Water: Plant or maintain ground cover in orchards or vineyards

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Crop production: Plant or maintain ground cover in orchards or vineyards

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2001–2006 in a chestnut orchard in northeast Portugal (same study as (8)) found higher chestnut yields in plots with resident vegetation (without tillage), compared to plots without ground cover (with conventional tillage). Crop yield: Higher chestnut yields were found in plots with ground cover, compared to plots without ground cover, in one of two comparisons (with resident vegetation: 27 vs 19 kg dry matter/tree). Implementation options: Lower chestnut yields were found in plots with seeded grasses and legumes, compared to resident vegetation (20 vs 27 kg dry matter/tree). Methods: There were three plots for each of two treatments (no tillage with ground cover: grasses and legumes, sown in 2001, or resident vegetation), and there were three control plots (conventional tillage, 15–20 cm depth, thrice/year). Each plot (600 m2) had six chestnut trees (40 years old in 2001) and was fertilized but not irrigated. Chestnuts were collected thrice/plot in 2003–2006. It was not clear whether these results were a direct effect of ground cover or tillage.

     

  2. Water: Plant or maintain ground cover in orchards or vineyards

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2001–2006 in a chestnut orchard in northeast Portugal found that more water was available to chestnut trees in plots with ground cover (without tillage), compared to plots with conventional tillage, in the driest year. Water availability: More water was available to chestnut trees in plots with ground cover, in one of four years (2005, the driest year: data reported as higher predawn water potential in chestnut leaves). Similar amounts of water were found in soils with or without ground cover (0.1–0.2 cm3 water/cm3 soil, at most depths, on most dates). Implementation options: Similar amounts of water were available to chestnut trees in plots with seeded cover crops, compared to resident vegetation (data reported as predawn water potential in chestnut leaves). Similar amounts of water were found in soils with seeded cover crops, compared to resident vegetation (0.1–0.2 cm3 water/cm3 soil, at most depths, on most dates). Methods: There were three plots for each of two treatments (no tillage with resident vegetation or grasses and legumes, sown in 2001), and there were three control plots (conventional tillage, 15–20 cm depth, thrice/year). Each plot (600 m2) had six chestnut trees (40 years old in 2001) and was fertilized but not irrigated. Soil water content was measured weekly with time-domain reflectometer probes (0–15 and 0–30 cm depth: four samples/plot; 45 and 75 cm: 2 samples/plot), in 2003–2006. Water potential was measured in June–September 2003–2006 (August–September in 2005) with gas exchangers (12 leaves/plot, south facing, up to 3 m high, 7:00–13:00 hours).

     

Output references

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 18

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust