Study

Long-term effect of tillage, nitrogen fertilization and cover crops on soil organic carbon and total nitrogen content

  • Published source details Mazzoncini M., Sapkota T.B., Bàrberi P., Antichi D. & Risaliti R. (2011) Long-term effect of tillage, nitrogen fertilization and cover crops on soil organic carbon and total nitrogen content. Soil and Tillage Research, 114, 165-174.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Pest regulation: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Pest regulation: Grow cover crops in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Soil: Grow cover crops in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Pest regulation: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1993–2008 in a rainfed wheat-maize-wheat-sunflower field in central Italy (partly the same study as (3)) found more weeds in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Pest numbers: More weeds were found in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage (21 vs 12 Mg/ha). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on 64 plots each (21 x 11 m sub-sub-plots). A mouldboard plough was used for conventional tillage (30–35 cm depth), and crop residues were incorporated into the soil. Pre-emergence herbicide was used for no tillage, and crop residues were mulched onto the surface. Post-emergence herbicide and fertilizer were used on all plots. Some plots had winter cover crops. Weeds were collected when the crops were harvested or the cover crops were suppressed (2–4 m2 quadrats), in 1994–2008.

     

  2. Pest regulation: Grow cover crops in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1993–2008 in a rainfed wheat-maize-wheat-sunflower field in central Italy found fewer weeds in plots with winter cover crops, compared to plots without cover crops. Pest numbers: Fewer weeds were found in plots with cover crops (7–18 vs 28 Mg/ha). Implementation options: Fewer weeds were found in plots with non-legume cover crops, compared to legumes (14–18 Mg/ha). Fewer weeds were found in plots with high-nitrogen-supply legumes, compared to low-nitrogen supply legumes (14 vs 18 Mg/ha). Methods: There were 32 plots (21 x 11 m sub-sub-plots) for each of three treatments (non-legumes, low-nitrogen-supply legumes, or high-nitrogen-supply legumes as winter cover crops) and there were 32 control plots (no cover crops: crop residues and weeds over winter). Different species of cover crops were used in different years. Half of the plots were tilled, and half were not tilled (but pre-emergence herbicide was used). Post-emergence herbicide and fertilizer were used on all plots. Weeds were collected when the crops were harvested or the cover crops were suppressed (2–4 m2 quadrats), in 1994–2008.

     

  3. Soil: Grow cover crops in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled before-and-after study in 1993–2008 in a rainfed wheat-maize-wheat-sunflower field in central Italy found more organic matter and nitrogen in soils with winter cover crops, compared to soils without cover crops. Organic matter: After 15 years, more carbon was found in soils with cover crops, compared to soils without cover crops, in four of six comparisons (legume cover crops, organic carbon concentration, 0–30 cm depth, in 2008: 11–14 vs 10–12 g/kg soil), and carbon increased more over time, in two of three comparisons (legume cover crops: 6–6.5% vs 1.5% increase in Mg organic C/ha, 0–30 cm depth). Nutrients: After 15 years, more nitrogen was found in soils with cover crops, compared to soils without cover crops, in five of six comparisons (total nitrogen concentration, 0–30 cm depth, in 2008: 1.2–1.5 vs 1.1–1.3 g/kg soil), and nitrogen increased over time, rather than decreased, in two of three comparisons (0.14–0.3% increase vs 0.7% decrease in Mg total N/ha, 0–30 cm depth). Implementation options: More carbon was found in soils that were cover cropped with high-nitrogen-supply legumes, compared to non-legumes (organic carbon concentration, 0–30 cm depth: 11–14 vs 10–13 g/kg soil), and more nitrogen was found at one of two depths (total nitrogen, 0–10 cm depth: 1.5 vs 1.4 g/kg soil). Methods: There were 32 plots (21 x 11 m sub-sub-plots) for each of three treatments (non-legumes, low-nitrogen-supply legumes, or high-nitrogen-supply legumes as winter cover crops) and one control (no cover crops: crop residues and weeds). Different species of cover crops were used in different years. Half of the plots were tilled, and half were not tilled (but pre-emergence herbicide was used). Post-emergence herbicide and fertilizer were used on all plots. Soil cores were collected in 1993, 1998, and 2008 (0–30 cm depth; two samples/plot in September).

     

  4. Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled before-and-after study in 1993–2008 in a rainfed wheat-maize-wheat-sunflower field in central Italy found more organic matter and nitrogen in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Organic matter: After 15 years, more carbon was found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, at one of two depths (0–10 cm depth, in 2008: 16 vs 11 g C/kg soil), and carbon increased over time (0–30 cm depth, from 1993 to 2008: 9% increase vs 1% decrease in C/ha). Nutrients: More nitrogen was found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, at one of two depths (0–10 cm depth, in 2008: 1.7 vs 1.2 g total N/kg soil), and nitrogen increased over time (0–30 cm depth, from 1993 to 2008: 0.6% increase vs 0.5% decrease in N/ha). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on 64 plots each (21 x 11 m sub-sub-plots). A mouldboard plough was used for conventional tillage (30–35 cm depth), and crop residues were incorporated into the soil. Pre-emergence herbicide was used for no tillage, and crop residues were mulched onto the surface. Post-emergence herbicide and fertilizer were used on all plots. Some plots had winter cover crops. Soil cores were collected in 1993, 1998, and 2008 for nutrients and organic matter (0–30 cm depth; two samples/plot in September).

     

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

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, 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 21

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 ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust