Study

Tillage influence on biophysical soil properties: The example of a long-term tillage experiment under Mediterranean rainfed conditions in South Spain

  • Published source details López-Garrido R., Deurer M., Madejón E., Murillo J.M. & Moreno F. (2012) Tillage influence on biophysical soil properties: The example of a long-term tillage experiment under Mediterranean rainfed conditions in South Spain. Soil and Tillage Research, 118, 52-60

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Water: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Soil: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Water: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1991–2008 in a rainfed wheat-sunflower-pea field near Seville, Spain, found similar amounts of water infiltration in soils with reduced tillage or conventional tillage. Water availability: Similar amounts of water infiltration were found in soils with reduced tillage or conventional tillage (0.28 vs 0.38 mm conductive macro-pore diameter). Methods: Reduced tillage or conventional tillage was used on three plots each (22 x 14 m plots). A mouldboard plough and a chisel plough were used for conventional tillage (25–30 cm depth), and crop residues were burned (1992–2003, but not 2004–2008). A chisel plough and herbicide were used for reduced tillage (25–30 cm depth), and crop residues were retained. Wheat, sunflowers, and peas were grown in rotation. Wheat was fertilized, but sunflowers and peas were not. Water infiltration was measured with an infiltrometer (between –60 and –20 mm tension) in 2008.

     

  2. Soil: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1991–2008 in a rainfed wheat-sunflower-pea field near Seville, Spain, found more organic matter, more soil organisms, and lower greenhouse-gas emissions in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Tillage had inconsistent effects on soil stability. Organic matter: More organic carbon was found in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of three comparisons (0–5 cm depth: 11 vs 10 g total organic C/kg soil). Soil organisms: More microbial biomass (measured as carbon) was found in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of three comparisons (0–5 cm depth: 885 vs 620 mg C/kg soil). Soil erosion and aggregation: More stable soils were found in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of nine comparisons (5–10 cm depth: 49 vs 39% water-stable aggregates), but less stable soils were found in one of nine comparisons (data reported as aggregation index). Greenhouse gases: Lower carbon dioxide emissions were found in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage (0.31 vs 0.40 g CO2/m2/hour). Methods: Reduced tillage or conventional tillage was used on three plots each (22 x 14 m plots). A mouldboard plough and a chisel plough were used for conventional tillage (25–30 cm depth), and crop residues were burned (1992–2003, but not 2004–2008). A chisel plough and herbicide were used for reduced tillage (25–30 cm depth), and crop residues were retained. Wheat, sunflowers, and peas were grown in rotation. Wheat was fertilized, but sunflowers and peas were not. Soil samples were collected in 2008 (0–25 cm depth, four samples/plot).

     

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 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