Study

Soil biochemical properties in a semiarid Mediterranean agroecosystem as affected by long-term tillage and N fertilization

  • Published source details Álvaro-Fuentes J., Morell F.J., Madejón E., Lampurlanés J., Arrúe J.L. & Cantero-Martínez C. (2013) Soil biochemical properties in a semiarid Mediterranean agroecosystem as affected by long-term tillage and N fertilization. Soil & Tillage Research, 129, 69-74

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Crop production: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Soil: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

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

Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Soil: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Crop production: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1996–2008 in a rainfed barley field in the Ebro river Valley, Spain, found more barley straw in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in two of three comparisons. Crop yield: More barley straw was found in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in two of three comparisons (2,083–2,265 vs 1,612–1,679 kg/ha). Methods: There were nine plots (50 x 6 m) for each of two tillage treatments (no tillage: pre-emergence herbicide and seed drill; reduced tillage: cultivator, 10–15 cm depth). Plots were tilled in October or November. Two-thirds of the plots were fertilized (60 or 120 kg N/ha/year). Barley was harvested in June.

     

  2. Soil: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1996–2008 in a rainfed barley field in the Ebro river Valley, Spain (same study as (2,8,11)), found more organic matter, but no difference in soil organisms, in soils with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. Organic matter: More organic carbon was found in soils with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage (9.25 vs 8.65 g C/kg dry soil). Soil organisms: No difference in microbial biomass (measured as carbon) was found between soils with no tillage or reduced tillage (295 vs 263 mg C/kg dry soil). Methods: There were nine plots (50 x 6 m) for each of two tillage treatments (no tillage: pre-emergence herbicide and seed drill; reduced tillage: cultivator, 10–15 cm depth). Plots were tilled in October or November. Soil samples were collected in October 2008 (before tillage, three soil cores/plot, 4 cm diameter, 0–50 cm depth).

     

  3. Crop production: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1996–2008 in a rainfed barley field in the Ebro river Valley, Spain (same study as (4,11-13)), found more barley straw in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in two of three comparisons. Crop yield: More barley straw was found in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in two of three comparisons (2,083–2,265 vs 1,571–1,748 kg/ha). Methods: There were nine plots (50 x 6 m) for each of two tillage treatments (no tillage: pre-emergence herbicide; conventional tillage: mouldboard plough, 25–30 cm depth). Plots were tilled in October or November. Two-thirds of the plots were fertilized (60 or 120 kg N/ha/year). Barley was harvested in June.

     

  4. Crop production: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1996–2008 in a rainfed barley field in the Ebro river valley, Spain (same study as (3,12-14)), found similar crop yields in plots with reduced tillage or conventional tillage. Crop yield: Similar amounts of barley straw were found in plots with reduced tillage or conventional tillage (1,190–1,679 vs 1,351–1,748 kg/ha). Methods: There were nine plots (50 x 6 m) for each of two tillage treatments (reduced tillage: cultivator, 10–15 cm depth; conventional tillage: mouldboard plough, 25–30 cm depth). Plots were tilled in October or November. Two-thirds of the plots were fertilized (60 or 120 kg N/ha/year). Barley was harvested in June.

     

  5. Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1996–2008 in a rainfed barley field in the Ebro river Valley, Spain (same study as (4,17,23,24,26)), found more organic matter and more soil organisms in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Organic matter: More organic carbon was found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage (9.25 vs 7.39 g C/kg dry soil). Soil organisms: More microbial biomass (measured as carbon) was found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage (295 vs 231 mg C/kg dry soil). Methods: There were nine plots (50 x 6 m) for each of two tillage treatments (no tillage: pre-emergence herbicide; conventional tillage: mouldboard plough, 25–30 cm depth). Plots were tilled in October or November. Soils samples were collected in October 2008 (before tillage, three soil cores/plot, 4 cm diameter, 0–50 cm depth).

     

  6. Soil: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1996–2008 in a rainfed barley field in the Ebro river valley, Spain (same study as (3,20,25,26)), found more organic matter, but similar amounts of soil organisms, in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Organic matter: More organic carbon was found in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage (8.65 vs 7.39 g C/kg dry soil). Soil organisms: Similar amounts of microbial biomass (measured as carbon) were found in soils with reduced tillage or conventional tillage (263 vs 231 mg C/kg dry soil). Methods: There were nine plots (50 x 6 m) for each of two tillage treatments (reduced tillage: cultivator, 10–15 cm depth; conventional tillage: mouldboard plough, 25–30 cm depth). Plots were tilled in October or November. Soil samples were collected in October 2008 (before tillage, three soil cores/plot, 4 cm diameter, 0–50 cm depth).

     

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