Study

Conservation versus Conventional Tillage on Performance of Three Different Crops

  • Published source details Yau S.K., Sidahmed M. & Haidar M. (2010) Conservation versus Conventional Tillage on Performance of Three Different Crops. Agronomy Journal, 102, 269-276

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Pest regulation: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Crop production: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Water: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Pest regulation: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Pest regulation: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Water: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Water: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Crop production: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Crop production: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Pest regulation: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2005–2007 in a rainfed field in the central Bekaa Valley, Lebanon, found fewer weeds in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. Pest numbers: Fewer weeds were found in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage (density: 43 vs 113 weeds/m2; dry weight: 34 vs 61 g/m2). Methods: No tillage or reduced tillage (shallow disc cultivation, 10 cm depth) was used in four plots each (14 x 6 m), in October. Barley, chickpeas, and safflower were planted in November. Barley and safflower were fertilized (60–100 kg N/ha). Weed density and dry weight were measured on 30 March. Herbicide was used on all plots after sowing the seeds in November 2005. Herbicide was also used, and all plots were hand weeded, after the weed measurements in 2006.

     

  2. Crop production: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2005–2007 in a rainfed field in the central Bekaa Valley, Lebanon, found higher seed and straw yields in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. Crop yield: Higher seed and straw yields were found in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in one of three crops (safflower seed: 2,600 vs 1,900 kg/ha; safflower straw: 9,950 vs 7,450). Methods: No tillage or reduced tillage (shallow disc cultivation, 10 cm depth) was used in four plots each (14 x 6 m), in October. Barley, chickpeas, and safflower were planted in November. Barley and safflower were fertilized (60–100 kg N/ha). Mature crops were collected in three quadrats/plot (0.25 m2 quadrats).

     

  3. Water: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2005–2007 in a rainfed field in the central Bekaa Valley, Lebanon, found no difference in water content between soils with no tillage and soils with reduced tillage. Water availability: No difference in water content was found in soils with no tillage and soils with reduced tillage (11–32% water). Methods: No tillage or reduced tillage (shallow disc cultivation, 10 cm depth) was used in four plots each (14 x 6 m), in October. Barley, chickpeas, and safflower were planted in November. Barley and safflower were fertilized (60–100 kg N/ha). Soil water was measured at two depths (25 and 50 cm), on five dates from 30 March 2005–16 August 2006, with a time domain reflectometer.

     

  4. Pest regulation: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2005–2007 in a rainfed field in the central Bekaa Valley, Lebanon, found similar amounts of weeds in plots with no tillage or conventional tillage. Pest numbers: Similar amounts of weeds were found in plots with no tillage or conventional tillage (density: 43 vs 44 weeds/m2; dry weight: 34 g/m2). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on four plots each (14 x 6 m), in October. Conventional plots were ploughed (25–30 cm depth) and then shallowly disk-cultivated. Barley, chickpeas, and safflower were planted in November. Barley and safflower were fertilized (60–100 kg N/ha). Weed density and dry weight were measured on 30 March. Herbicide was used on all plots after sowing the seeds in November 2005. Herbicide was also used, and all plots were hand weeded, after the weed measurements in 2006.

     

  5. Pest regulation: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2005–2007 in a rainfed field in the central Bekaa Valley, Lebanon, found more weeds in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Pest numbers: More weeds were found in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage (density: 113 vs 44 weeds/m2; dry weight: 61 vs 34 g/m2). Methods: Reduced tillage or conventional tillage was used in four plots each (14 x 6 m), in October. Conventional plots were ploughed (25–30 cm depth) and then shallowly disc cultivated. Reduced plots were shallowly disc cultivated (10 cm depth). Barley, chickpeas, and safflower were planted in November. Barley and safflower were fertilized (60–100 kg N/ha). Weed density and dry weight were measured on 30 March. Herbicide was used on all plots after sowing the seeds in November 2005. Herbicide was also used, and all plots were hand weeded, after the weed measurements in 2006.

     

  6. Water: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2005–2007 in a rainfed field in the central Bekaa Valley, Lebanon, found less water in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of 10 comparisons. Water availability: Less water was found in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of 10 comparisons (water content not reported). Methods: Reduced tillage or conventional tillage was used in four plots each (14 x 6 m), in October. Conventional plots were ploughed (25–30 cm depth) and then shallowly disc cultivated. Reduced plots were shallowly disc cultivated (10 cm depth). Barley, chickpeas, and safflower were planted in November. Barley and safflower were fertilized (60–100 kg N/ha). Soil water was measured at two depths (25 and 50 cm), on five dates from 30 March 2005–16 August 2006, with a time domain reflectometer.

     

  7. Water: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2005–2007 in a rainfed field in the central Bekaa Valley, Lebanon, found less water in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of 10 comparisons. Water availability: Less water was found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of 10 comparisons (water content not reported). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on four plots each (14 x 6 m), in October. Conventional plots were ploughed (25–30 cm depth) and then shallowly disk-cultivated. Barley, chickpeas, and safflower were planted in November. Barley and safflower were fertilized (60–100 kg N/ha). Soil water was measured at two depths (25 and 50 cm), on five dates from 30 March 2005–16 August 2006, with a time-domain reflectometer.

     

  8. Crop production: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2005–2007 in a rainfed field in the central Bekaa Valley, Lebanon, found lower seed yields, but higher straw yields, in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Crop yield: Lower seed yields were found in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of three crops (barley seeds: 3,550 vs 4,550 kg/ha), but higher straw yields were found in one of three crops (safflower straw: 9,950 vs 9,050). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on four plots each (14 x 6 m), in October. Conventional plots were ploughed (25–30 cm depth) and then shallowly disk-cultivated. Barley, chickpeas, and safflower were planted in November. Barley and safflower were fertilized (60–100 kg N/ha). Mature crops were collected in three quadrats/plot (0.25 m2 quadrats).

     

  9. Crop production: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2005–2007 in a rainfed field in the central Bekaa Valley, Lebanon, found lower seed and straw yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in some crops. Crop yield: Lower seed yields were found in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in two of three crops (barley: 3,250 vs 4,550 kg/ha; safflower: 1,900 vs 2,400), and lower straw yields were found in one of three crops (safflower: 7,450 vs 9,050). Methods: Reduced tillage or conventional tillage was used in four plots each (14 x 6 m), in October. Conventional plots were ploughed (25–30 cm depth) and then shallowly disc cultivated. Reduced plots were shallowly disc cultivated (10 cm depth). Barley, chickpeas, and safflower were planted in November. Barley and safflower were fertilized (60–100 kg N/ha). Mature crops were collected in three quadrats/plot (0.25 m2 quadrats).

     

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 latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

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