Study

Effects of tillage systems in dryland farming on near-surface water content during the late winter period

  • Published source details Josa R. & Hereter A. (2005) Effects of tillage systems in dryland farming on near-surface water content during the late winter period. Soil and Tillage Research, 82, 173-183

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Water: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Water: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Water: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

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

    A controlled study in 1994–1999 in a rainfed legume-cereal field near Barcelona, Spain, found more water in soils with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. Water availability: More water was found in soils with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage (33 vs 29 mm mean topsoil water content in February–May). Methods: No tillage or reduced tillage was used on one plot each (90 x 30 m plots). A cultivator (August), a chisel plough (September), and a harrow and roller (November) were used for reduced tillage (depth not reported). Herbicide was used for no tillage (August). Herbicide was used in both plots in September and January, and fertilizer was added in October. Seeds were sown with a seed drill in December and crops were harvested in July. Crop residues were removed from all plots before tillage. Water was measured weekly (February–May, two time-domain reflectometer probes/plot, 20 cm depth).

     

  2. Water: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A controlled study in 1994–1999 in a rainfed legume-cereal field near Barcelona, Spain, found more water in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Water availability: More water was found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage (33 vs 26 mm mean topsoil water content in February–May). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on one plot each (90 x 30 m plots). A cultivator (August), a mouldboard plough (September), and a harrow and a roller (November) were used for conventional tillage (depth not reported). Herbicide was used for no tillage (August). Herbicide was used in both plots in September and January, and fertilizer was added in October. Seeds were sown with a seed drill in December and crops were harvested in July. Crop residues were removed from all plots before tillage. Water was measured weekly (February–May, two time-domain reflectometer probes/plot, 20 cm depth).

     

  3. Water: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

    A controlled study in 1994–1999 in a rainfed legume-cereal field near Barcelona, Spain, found more water in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Water availability: More water was found in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage (29 vs 26 mm mean topsoil water content in February–May). Methods: Reduced tillage or conventional tillage was used on one plot each (90 x 30 m plots). A mouldboard plough was used for conventional tillage, and a chisel plough was used for reduced tillage, in September (depths not reported). Herbicide was used in both plots in September and January, and fertilizer was added in October. Seeds were sown with a seed drill in December and crops were harvested in July. Crop residues were removed from all plots before tillage. Water was measured weekly (February–May, two time-domain reflectometer probes/plot, 20 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 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